When explaining blogging to the interested but ignorant, I always give them a skewed picture. Once I showed them research blogs and got questions about why nobody used this medium for personal expression. Another time I showed them personal weblogs and was told that it was a pity it was impossible to use blogs for any serious purpose. I show them student and teaching blogs and I’m asked why there are no researcher’s blogs. I show them the blogs of presidential candidates and politicians and technologists and they tell me that there’s no daring in blogs, they’re conversationalists, blandly censored without the gut emotions that a novelist would dare write on a page or a lovesick girl in her locked diary, there’s none of the agony of a suicide note.

And there is. There’s all this, and more. And it’s quite impossible to show in 45 minutes. I don’t know how to convey it. You need to walk this country to see it.


Discover more from Jill Walker Rettberg

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

2 thoughts on “walk

  1. Holly's Research Journal

    On the virtue of posting half-baked ideas
    James McGee posted an article recently called Rational ignorance

  2. Mathemagenic

    You need to walk this country to see it
    Some of my colleagues are starting weblogs.

Leave A Comment

Recommended Posts

AI STORIES

AI-generated stories have longer endings than human stories

My colleague Jessica Witte has just shared a preprint where she compared the emotional arcs of the stories we generated using gpt-4o-mini to those of human-authored (pre-2022) stories from the subreddit r/WritingPrompts, conveniently gathered in this dataset. She found a distinct difference in the endings of the LLM-generated stories: both […]

How to peer review a paper in 2026

Dorothy Bishop, a psychologist, wrote a useful list of what reviewers need to look out now that so many papers are bad science that looks good thanks to LLMs. Read her whole blog post, she explains it well, but here’s a brief version because I’m pretty sure we’ll be needing […]

“So what if it was ChatGPT? It *could* have been true!”

I recently read a good article on the different kinds of truth a language model operates with by Luke Mann, Liam Magee and Vanicka Arora, Truth Machines: Synthesizing Veracity in AI Language Models, but despite its lovely typology of truths (consensus, correspondence, coherence and pragmatic) it doesn’t help me with […]

AI STORIES

AI shimmer and sparkle

I have this hunch that sparkles and glow and shimmer are somehow a point in the latent spaces of LLMs that have more connections than you would expect. Perhaps their connotation to magic and to the unknown matches some of the mystique of genAI? Or perhaps these words are used […]

Don’t do a systematic review if you’re in the humanities

This paper is a great example of why you probably shouldn’t use a systematic literature review for a theoretical and conceptual research question like “How does artificial intelligence affect the perception of authenticity and aura in art?” However, if you’re looking for an annotated list of 48 recent articles about […]