Angus Johnston

This is a very silly framing of the relevant issue. It's like saying "if a text-to-speech converter is analyzing speech, interpreting it, and converting it to written language, but is not 'listening,' the word 'listening' has no meaning." No. "A meaning different than mine" is not "no meaning."

As is so often the case, Stancil has concluded that if someone else is saying something that's incorrect, it follows that (1) that person is egregiously wrong, (2) that person is operating in bad faith, out of animus, or out of peer pressure, and (3) Stancil's opposing claim is obviously correct.

This is a very silly framing of the relevant issue. It's like saying "if a text-to-speech converter is analyzing speech, interpreting it, and converting it to written language, but is not 'listening,' the word 'listening' has no meaning." No. "A meaning different than mine" is not "no meaning."

Whether an LLM is "understanding" is the very definition of a definitional issue. And what is common sense to one person (Will Stancil, say, or not-Will-Stancil), may not be to another (not-Will-Stancil, for instance, or in the alternative, Will Stancil.)

One thing I’ve noticed about the Tilly Norwood media blitz: There’s a lot of talk about an upcoming movie, but very little evidence that that movie actually … exists.

Oh, and one of the articles I read on a recent "Tilly Norwood" interview makes clear that the "Tilly Norwood" program they roll out for interviews is not the program they're developing for "acting" work. Which makes sense, given how different the two sets of capabilities needed are.

This is such a good point (the post below and the one after it). The distance from where we are to "financially successful narrative AI movie with AI actors" is vast, and the distance from there to "AI movie stars" is probably just as big, maybe bigger.

Because, again, even humans don't get to be movie stars by going on CNN and saying "I'm going to be a movie star, as soon as someone puts me in a movie." And that's not because humans haven't tried! That's a tactic humans have tried!

This is such a good point (the post below and the one after it). The distance from where we are to "financially successful narrative AI movie with AI actors" is vast, and the distance from there to "AI movie stars" is probably just as big, maybe bigger.

The way celebrity works is that the public latches on to someone they see DOING something—singing, acting, modeling, reality TV, being related to someone famous, punching strangers on TikTok, whatever. And it's that interest that enables the celebrity to get bigger, or big in a different medium.

This is such a good point (the post below and the one after it). The distance from where we are to "financially successful narrative AI movie with AI actors" is vast, and the distance from there to "AI movie stars" is probably just as big, maybe bigger.

And this response to "a different character" gets at a chunk of why I think that either they're not actually hoping to make "Tilly Norwood" a "movie star," or are doomed to flame out ignominiously if they are. Because if you wanted to do it, you wouldn't be doing this.

It does occur to me as well to contemplate where Lisa Murkowski, who is up for re-election in 2028, lands on all sorts of questions in 2027 if she finds herself in a Dem senate—particularly one in which Mary Peltola is her Alaskan colleague.

(I am not a "Murkowski will save us!" person. But it does seem clear that her inclinations and incentives are quite different than, say, Collins's.)

This is such a good point (the post below and the one after it). The distance from where we are to "financially successful narrative AI movie with AI actors" is vast, and the distance from there to "AI movie stars" is probably just as big, maybe bigger.

One thing I’ve noticed about the Tilly Norwood media blitz: There’s a lot of talk about an upcoming movie, but very little evidence that that movie actually … exists.

To put it another way, there's a company that says they're planning on making a Tilly Norwood movie, but the hard evidence that anyone's actually going to make that movie is still very very thin. And though that company describes itself as a production studio, they've never made a movie before.

One thing I’ve noticed about the Tilly Norwood media blitz: There’s a lot of talk about an upcoming movie, but very little evidence that that movie actually … exists.

“There are dozens of us! Dozens!”

Usually I check to see if someone’s already made a joke like this before posting. This time? I assume they have, and don’t care.

We've reached the "Republican House Members cutting anti-Trump campaign ads" stage of the GOP implosion.

Wheeeeee!

We've reached the "Republican House Members cutting anti-Trump campaign ads" stage of the GOP implosion.

Looking at the rankings on the various prediction sites—not the betting sites, the analysis sites—there seem to be something like FIFTY House seats held by Republicans that are more at risk of flipping than Salazar's. If she goes ... it's an absurd bloodbath.

We've reached the "Republican House Members cutting anti-Trump campaign ads" stage of the GOP implosion.

Also: "the leader is getting bad advice from his minions" is PRECISELY how you criticize a vengeful dictator, if you want to stay out of prison. That it's such a common trope in GOP criticism of Trump is one of those small clear tells that reveal so much.

We've reached the "Republican House Members cutting anti-Trump campaign ads" stage of the GOP implosion.