Josh McCrain
@joshmccrain.bsky.social
Political scientist at the University of Utah. Public policy, political institutions, media and politics
absolutely deranged. why use a calculator when you can simply do the OLS matrix algebra by hand? same argument
November 26, 2025 at 4:23 PM
absolutely deranged. why use a calculator when you can simply do the OLS matrix algebra by hand? same argument
Yes, exactly! Anybody refusing to detail this kind of use case to students is doing them a disservice. Would be akin to refusing to use a personal computer when they became prevalent
November 24, 2025 at 9:13 PM
Yes, exactly! Anybody refusing to detail this kind of use case to students is doing them a disservice. Would be akin to refusing to use a personal computer when they became prevalent
dude! this is awesome, where are you finding this
November 24, 2025 at 4:29 PM
dude! this is awesome, where are you finding this
Bluesky has tons of diversity in viewpoints. You've got the crazy left, the progressive left, and the center left
November 24, 2025 at 3:28 PM
Bluesky has tons of diversity in viewpoints. You've got the crazy left, the progressive left, and the center left
Oh my god there's like 25 coauthors on this
November 21, 2025 at 4:04 AM
Oh my god there's like 25 coauthors on this
I think low, right now. But agent based browsers will easily be able to do this and they are very close to being used at scale
November 21, 2025 at 3:55 AM
I think low, right now. But agent based browsers will easily be able to do this and they are very close to being used at scale
Some good stuff from Sean here:
November 20, 2025 at 5:53 PM
Some good stuff from Sean here:
what's this from?
November 19, 2025 at 6:30 PM
what's this from?
yep I think this is probably where we're headed. all of this will of course make survey work much more expensive
November 19, 2025 at 4:36 PM
yep I think this is probably where we're headed. all of this will of course make survey work much more expensive
I can also vouch for prolific as a presently very good sample provider. The paper is outlining a threat that is surely not realized yet
November 19, 2025 at 3:20 PM
I can also vouch for prolific as a presently very good sample provider. The paper is outlining a threat that is surely not realized yet
Yes but I think the core concern is it's essentially impossible to know *how much* AI has taken over platforms
November 19, 2025 at 3:17 PM
Yes but I think the core concern is it's essentially impossible to know *how much* AI has taken over platforms
the scale fully depends on how you throttle, i guess. but yes, all valid points. but the "cost" to making a bot is extremely low in terms of time, and this will get increasingly easier moving forward especially as agent-based AIs become more prevalent
November 18, 2025 at 11:58 PM
the scale fully depends on how you throttle, i guess. but yes, all valid points. but the "cost" to making a bot is extremely low in terms of time, and this will get increasingly easier moving forward especially as agent-based AIs become more prevalent
it's definitely real. link to full draft in replies. possible sean broke the embargo early at PNAS
November 18, 2025 at 11:55 PM
it's definitely real. link to full draft in replies. possible sean broke the embargo early at PNAS
Hey folks, there is QUALITATIVE research. You know, TALKING to ACTUAL people. Hire Anthroplogists.
new paper by Sean Westwood:
With current technology, it is impossible to tell whether survey respondents are real or bots. Among other things, makes it easy for bad actors to manipulate outcomes. No good news here for the future of online-based survey research
With current technology, it is impossible to tell whether survey respondents are real or bots. Among other things, makes it easy for bad actors to manipulate outcomes. No good news here for the future of online-based survey research
November 18, 2025 at 9:59 PM
To me, the point of this paper though is that we cannot know when the pool gets "bad" because responses look like normal quality human response
November 18, 2025 at 9:39 PM
To me, the point of this paper though is that we cannot know when the pool gets "bad" because responses look like normal quality human response
Trivial to program llms around both
November 18, 2025 at 9:31 PM
Trivial to program llms around both
Correct, but it will only get easier and as he points out economic incentives are there
November 18, 2025 at 9:26 PM
Correct, but it will only get easier and as he points out economic incentives are there
I love prolific and have spent thousands with yall (didn't see your profile), but the key is not identify verification. It's that once identified, it's impossible to determine whether they're humans doing the actual responding. Throttling seems to be the best approach, though
November 18, 2025 at 9:18 PM
I love prolific and have spent thousands with yall (didn't see your profile), but the key is not identify verification. It's that once identified, it's impossible to determine whether they're humans doing the actual responding. Throttling seems to be the best approach, though
Everything prolific does there can be fooled as Sean outlines
November 18, 2025 at 9:05 PM
Everything prolific does there can be fooled as Sean outlines
Definitely the worst response to this by far is "why would you study public opinion anyway just talk to people" I mean jfc
November 18, 2025 at 8:42 PM
Definitely the worst response to this by far is "why would you study public opinion anyway just talk to people" I mean jfc