Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Felt my swearing abilities waning. This plus Blackadder should reskill me swiftly.

Photo of the thick of it dvd or Blu-ray or whatever box with a pink keyboard behind. Malcolm Tucker is of course looking menacing on the cover.

January 19, 2026 at 1:06 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

From the moment we know a technology steals/obfuscates people's labour to perform task X, it matters 0 how effective the people's labour you steal to do X is. They will likely get better at X over time and you will get better at stealing. Nothing of this justifies the theft. bsky.app/profile/oliv...

In this paper, I turn this frame on its head (cf. Andersen et al., 2023; Bannon, 2011;
Bishop, 2021; Nick Dyer-Witheford, 2019; Rogers, 2022; Ryan, 2024; Schmager et al., 2025;
Shneiderman, 2022; Steinhoff, 2021; Walton & Nayak, 2021). Using a unique (re)definition of
AI that releases us from a correlationist1 grip, we then examine three triplets as case studies of
techno-social relationships between cognition and artifacts. To presage the coming analyses,
herein AI is any techno-social relationship that outsources to machines or algorithms some
part, however small, of human cognitive labour (cf. van Rooĳ et al., 2024). I demonstrate
that AI is human-centric, not because it behaves like or is designed to be like humans, but
because it requires a ghost in the machine, often literally an obfuscated human-in-the-loop
to properly function (also see Guest & Martin, 2025) because AI is humans albeit in fetishised
(Braune, 2020; Morris, 2017; Mota & Cosentino Filho, 2024), obfuscated forms (e.g. Erscoi
et al., 2023). That is, AI “is in reality produced by relations among people [even though
it] appears before us in a fantastic form as relations among things” (Pfaffenberger, 1988, p.
250). AI’s “technological veil” hides human cognitive labour (Mota & Cosentino Filho, 2024).
I bring this anthropological, sociotechnical and broadly computational cognitive scientific
angle to understanding AI, that is unlike “the skills and techniques of behavioural research,
previously applied to humans and other animals[, which claim to help us] better understand
the ‘psychology’ of complex black-box ANNs” (Wills, 2025, n.p. cf. Raley and Rhee, 2023). In
fact behavioural probing of such systems using such experimental techniques assumes their
psychological standing to be equal to, or comparable to, biological organisms: it begs the
question (see for relevant analyses: Forbes & Guest, 2025; Guest & Martin, 2023, 2024; Raji
et al., 2022).

There are no Rube Goldberg-like perpetual motion-like human-in-the-loop-free machines.
There never will be. We might crave such a machine, but the only entities we know that are
self-sustaining, autopoietic, is everything but machines. The only person who can decide to
turn a computer off and then on again is exactly that: a person (Polo, 2024). To effectively avoid
correlationism, obfuscation of cognition in AI, we must reject the current mainstream view:
no amount of high scores on benchmarks, or any other correlationary evidence, can ever pile
up high enough to graduate to a causal claim. To de-fetishise AI, we must accept that AI is any
relationship between technology, tools, models, machines and humans where it appears as if
some cognitive labour is offloaded onto such artifacts, and furthermore we must accept that
such a relationship requires methodical teasing apart to obviate the centrality of the human
(Bernardi, 2024; Braune, 2020; Morris, 2017; Mota & Cosentino Filho, 2024; Pfaffenberger,
1988). We cannot rid the machine from its ghost. But we can rid the concept of human from
ghostliness — the human “need not be degraded to a machine by being denied to be a ghost
in a machine.” (Ryle, 1949, p. 301)

January 19, 2026 at 7:04 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

How is there still this pathetic clump of snow? It hasn't snowed for a week or longer. Anyway... Cold, crisp, very winter.

Dirty pile of snow near the canal. Sun is setting and reflecting off the water.

Dutchology, a bike. It's white and locked to a red stand. Everything else is gray and brown except a garage door in petrol blue.

Rotting orange crabapples mixed with a holly bush

A huge holly tree looking really majestic with amazing red berries

January 18, 2026 at 6:41 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

For all those involved in drafting so-called AI guidelines, but being overwhelmed with nonsense, this is a lifesaver. Great work by Dagmar and Ariel!

Resisting Enchantment and Determinism: How to critically engage with AI university guidelines. doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

The list of most relevant themes we identified is:
1. Rhetoric of inevitability and technological determinism: presenting the adoption and use of
(generative) AI as a fait accompli.
2. Exaggerated narratives: overstating the general capabilities of the technology, or leaving out that
certain seemingly impressive capabilities can only be achieved under very specific experimental
conditions.
3. Spurious comparison to human intelligence or Anthropomorphism: presenting AI as if it thinks or
reason like a human.
4. Ethics and critical washing: presenting AI as being ethically or critically examined but doing so only
superficially and inconsequentially.
5. Wishful thinking and uncertain feasibility: assuming desired outcomes or functionality despite lacking
realistic evidence they can be achieved.
6. GenAI is presented as indispensable: portraying AI as essential even when simpler or non-AI solutions
are sufficient.
7. Unrealistic and ill-defined conditions: formulating requirements for adoption and use that are
functionally impossible or too demanding to be met, psychologically implausible to follow, or set
unclear boundaries for acceptable and unacceptable behaviour, which could easily create
inconsistencies.
8. Resources as propaganda: resources for students, faculty, and other stakeholders are made available
but only for incentivizing different degrees of use of genAI.
9. AI Overkill: Substitution or replacement of tasks for which the technology was not designed; from
tutoring to teaching to research, everything must be now with AI, even if it is not adequate.
Due to space limitations, rather than discussing all of the themes superficially, this essay addresses only the
first four, which, in our view, are the most critical and the most urgently in need of critical scrutiny. T

January 18, 2026 at 6:47 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Buy a physical book and remove the cover. Vandalism like mess is acceptable when it's for good 🥰

Kitchen table with a nest of books. Another science is possible, cybernetic revolutionaries, the unity of perception, deflating mental representation. 🫡

January 13, 2026 at 8:40 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

harsh but fair 🥲 thx for feedback

January 12, 2026 at 2:03 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

"baby eating bishop of bath and wells" ass but yes it is 100% but I do have them all

Boxset of Blackadder the complete collection

January 12, 2026 at 8:53 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

I did it. I hate streaming with a passion and I also apparently already have the Blackadder floors anyway. Got myself a belated Xmas present. 😌

Blu-ray dvd player box on the couch with remotes.

Projector showing the dvd menu which has the Blackadder 2 black and white tiles that match the ones on my floor.

January 12, 2026 at 8:46 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

bsky.app/profile/oliv...

CC @andreaeyleen.bsky.social

January 8, 2026 at 3:46 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

I wrote a bit about it here bsky.app/profile/oliv...

Introduction
[M]odels have to be used before they will give up their secrets. In this sense,
they have the quality of a technology — the power of the model only becomes
apparent in the context of its use. (Morrison & Morgan, 1999, p. 12)
We are experiencing a point in history that considers itself separate, unique, a zenith of
human civilisation, presented as disconnected from the past through a series of technological
sea changes. In extreme cases, we are detached from even the last few months: the newest
version of a piece of artificial intelligence (AI) software is the definitive one, everything else
is irrelevant. And so findings in AI are held to expire. Our AI students describe their own
knowledge and skills — even their whole degree itself — as having upcoming sell-by dates.
Research in AI is thus often framed as unmoored from historical, ethical, social, and legal
precedents.
The speed of the “ultra rapid computing machine,” as Wiener (1948, 1950) de-
scribes computers, becomes a metaphor for the speed of change and of techno-
logical progress. This notion of condensed time operates as a further discursive
regularity in two ways. First, it forms an overall temporal backdrop against which
various cybernetic dramas are played out. Second, condensed time becomes a
measure of the performance of humans and machines.
Hughes (1985) offers a telling example of the first manifestation of condensed
time:
In the scant two hundred years since the early Industrial Revolution,
Western man has totally rescaled and changed the face and fabric of his
environment. Indeed, the changes have proceeded at such an acceler-
ated pace that we might use the word “old” or “outmoded” to refer to
last month’s computer model. (p. 205)
1 O. Guest
This sense of condensing time—of speed, of rapid change—imbues virtually all
the popular literature examined. It becomes a contextual operator, stated but not
questioned. (Hamilton, 1998, p. 193)
What Sheryl N. Hamilt…

January 7, 2026 at 5:48 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

"Great man theorising requires the (re)orientation of the theory to direct all credit to one person (or a biased subset of a select few) reminiscent of monarchy—far from the pluralistic or meritocratic facade science often hides behind"

doi.org/10.1007/s421...

Great Man Theorising
Most of the work on women scientists fits the “history of great men” mold, with women simply substituted for men. Thus, we have many biographies of great women scientists. These biographical studies of women scientists, for the most part, place the achievements of Marie Curie or Rosalind Franklin within the male world, demonstrating that women have, in fact, made important contributions to what has been defined as mainstream science. Yet the focus remains on the woman as exceptional—the woman who defied convention to claim a prominent position in an essentially male world. One of the problems with this approach to history is that it retains the male norm as the measure of excellence.

Londa Schiebinger, 1987, p. 314

On the one hand, it is common knowledge that scholarly activities are the fruit of the labour of teams of so-called great men’s students, mentees, collaborators, and partners. While on the other hand, the formal archival record gives a dramatically different account attributing such scientific outputs solely to individual men, and more recently individual people generally. To wit, great man theorising is ‘an important obstacle to building theory’ (van Rooij , 2021; also see van Rooij , 2022). Great man theorists fabricate and/or obscure anecdotal and historical evidence to ensure the credit is directed at the target prestigious figure. For example, Pythagoras is overwhelmingly named and credited, but he had many women disciples, who were philosophers and mathematicians in their own right, whose writings survive to this day, and after his death, Theano (a woman, possibly his wife) took over as head of his academy (Schiebinger, 1987; Wider, 1986). To give another example, Lavoisier, the chemist credited with discovering oxygen, was also a woman: Marie Anne Paulze Lavoisier. She could have been credited jointly with her husband, but was not (Eagle & Sloan, 1998).

Great man theorising requires the (re)orientation of the theory to direct all credit to one person (or a biased subset of a select few) reminiscent of monarchy—far from the pluralistic or meritocratic facade science often hides behind—where few are in power and get credit, while many toil unseen (see Birhane and Guest , 2021, for more on how to deal with this). In reality, none of the research would be possible without all the laboratory members and students. Even if (in the unlikely case) the singular so-called great person is indeed generating all the ideas, the mental space they enjoy is only possible by the grace of their students, mentees, and employees.

December 30, 2025 at 8:46 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

sometimes random cypriot street plants are kinda subtly breathtaking 🌿🌸

Light lilac flowers on a succulent looking vining plant

More of the same showing more of the heart shaped leaves and stone wall behind it

December 29, 2025 at 3:42 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Come now... Why would anybody pay this? 😵‍💫

Affordable
Our Pro plan—available for just $24.99/month—ensures articles are sent to peers for feedback using our AI-assisted invitation process. For the price of one average APC, you can have Qeios Pro and unlimited publishing possibilities for 10 years. Importantly, authors can publish completely free if their articles attract spontaneous reviewers and already meet language and field standards.

December 29, 2025 at 8:39 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

𓆤 möth 𓆤

Mottled brown and white moth sitting on a window

December 28, 2025 at 5:42 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

"We should acknowledge that AI does not care about Ethics, because it is dependent on political authority that can easily shift any ethical responsibility evading legal repercussions."

This is why the field of AI ethics is a scam.

(Fig from umaine.edu/learnwithai/ which I'm not familiar with)

Figure with a lightning bolt that says IMPACT RISK and each letter is a phrase see more here https://ai-impact-risk.com/

December 28, 2025 at 7:36 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

and some seem to be curious about why I think this; I guess I looked for myself too. I recommend it actually if you want to understand this type of misogyny

$Zoomer Antimillenarian ‪@surcomplicated.bsky.social‬ Follow Any actually existing universe can only instantiate some infinitesimal minute fraction of all consistent mathematical patterns. van Rooij thinks that this requires ‘fine-tuning’ when in fact any random selection will do. What she’s doing is on par w/ crank failed string theorists & youth pastors. ‪atticus goldfinch‬ ‪@atticusgf.bsky.social‬ · 2d Hell, she even leans into the "fine-tuning" argument. Claims evolution faces insurmountable complexity barriers, & doesn't get to escape them. That evolution didn't result in cognition. What did? Well, the universe is "friendly" and gives solvable tasks. This is "fine-tuning"! Intelligent design!$

December 25, 2025 at 8:38 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Yeah, this is a huge obsession with these people, also see footnote 2 from:

Guest, O. & Martin, A. E. (2025). A Metatheory of Classical and Modern Connectionism. Psychological Review. doi.org/10.1037/rev0...
PDF: repository.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/ha...

This characterization of human-likeness is the case only in complex or
dubious ways (e.g., Leivada, Günther, & Dentella, 2024). Also, the concept
of deeper models being more human-like is consistent with the classical
dualist perspective: “The difference between machines and natural objects is
simply one of degree for Descartes[. M]achines are works of nature differing
from other natural objects only by degree of complexity” (Hattab, 2009,
p. 85). 3 As in other m

December 16, 2025 at 9:18 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

OK, bonus, some art: an Olmec head destroying a Tesla by @chavismarmol.bsky.social — chavismarmol.com you have GOT to visit that website; it is amazing! 🤩

Read more: hyperallergic.com/878913/artis...

3/3

Last Monday, March 11, artist Chavis Mármol dropped a nine-ton Olmec head made of quarry stone onto a blue Tesla Model 3. (all photos by and courtesy the artist)

more: https://hyperallergic.com/878913/artist-chavis-marmol-crushes-tesla-with-colossal-olmec-head-sculpture/

December 14, 2025 at 8:06 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Another cool one is the Mayan calendrical system: "highly precise and directly translatable to a system of gears" doi.org/10.5281/zeno... — much like gears in clockwork & the Antikythera Mechanism of course.

See more: maya.nmai.si.edu/sites/defaul...
www.mayaarchaeologist.co.uk/public-resou...

2/n

The Maya Calendar System
Using their knowledge of astronomy and mathematics, the Maya developed one of the most accurate cal-
endar systems in human history. The Maya calendar system has its roots in older, Mesoamerican1 indig-
enous civilizations, particularly the
Olmec. The Maya calendar is complex
and serves both practical and ceremoni-
al purposes. The Maya calendar system
includes several calendars that mea-
sure time periods of varying lengths.
These calendars are based on solar,
lunar, planetary, and human cycles.
There are three most commonly known
cyclical calendars used by the Maya.
These include the Haab which is a 365-
day solar calendar, the Tzolk’in which
is a 260-day sacred calendar, and the
Calendar Round of 52 years. In
addition, the Maya developed the Long
Count calendar to date mythical and
historical events chronologically.
1 Definitions for words in red-colored font can be found in the Glossary page in the Resources section of the “Living
Maya Time” website.
A contemporary representation of the Tzolk’in (inner green circle)
and Haab (outer brown circle) calendars.
The Haab
The Maya solar calendar, called Haab, is a count of 365 days and thus approximates the solar year. The word
“haab” means “year” in the Yucatec Mayan language. The Haab is composed of 18 months made of 20 days
each, plus one month made of 5 days. A month made of 20 days is called a uinal. Each uinal has its own
name. These 18 months together equal 360 days. The last month made of 5 days is called Wayeb. The 19
months together total 365 days.
18 x 20 + 5 = 3652
Table 1: Haab Months and Days
Pop
Wo’
Sip
Sotz’
Sek
Xul
Yaxk’in
Mol
Ch’en
Yax
Sak’
Keh
Mak
K’ank’in
Muwan
Pax
K’ayab
Kumk’u
Wayeb
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7…

the calendar also shown as gears! from https://www.mayaarchaeologist.co.uk/public-resources/maya-world/maya-calendar-system/

December 14, 2025 at 7:53 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Some examples of decolonial automata/computations, apropos of giving a mini talk on this tomorrow:

Towards Critical Artificial Intelligence Literacies doi.org/10.5281/zeno...

🐯 Tipu's tiger is amazing; sadly stolen & now in the V&A, created in India & depicting a tiger mauling an English man.

1/n

On the flip side, we can include positive examples in our teaching on the history of AI: Tipu’s
tiger from late 18th century India, featuring the eponymous robotic cat mauling a European man
(Karp et al. 2013); the Antikythera Mechanism from ancient Greece, which was a clockwork astro-
logical calender; and the Mayans’ calendrical system that was highly precise and directly translat-
able to a system of gears. We can also explain the origin of ‘algorithm’ and ‘algebra’, conceptually
developed during the Islamic Golden Age. These serve not only to properly contextualise the his-
tory of AI (Mayor 2018), but to reimagine with students what could be done differently.
Regardless of AI, science has always been intertwined with domination, extraction, binary
thinking, and the imposition of hierarchies (Tacheva et al. 2023). For example, the Cartesian dualist
idea that the mind can be separated from the body is at the core of AI hype. Corporate discourses
around AI feature preposterous claims, such that ‘ChatGPT has PhD level cognition capacities’,
and they will be able to surpass human intelligence in the near future (Welt 2025), implying that
technologies are human-like. However, far from LLMs having cognitive capacities, companies ob-
fuscate the labour that is extracted from data workers (Miceli et al. 2020). In the classroom, we
should question the mind and body binary and render visible its eugenical and colonial legacies.
While we refute corporate claims, we also take them seriously as dehumanising workers, women,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipu%27s_Tiger Tipu's Tiger, Tippu's Tiger or Tipoo’s Tiger is an 18th-century automaton created for Tipu Sultan, the ruler of the Kingdom of Mysore (present day Karnataka) in India. The carved and painted wood casing represents a tiger mauling a near life-size European man. Mechanisms inside the tiger and the man's body make one hand of the man move, emit a wailing sound from his mouth and grunts from the tiger. In addition a flap on the side of the tiger folds down to reveal the keyboard of a small pipe organ with 18 notes.[1]

zoomed in to the tiger biting the man's neck

Tipu's Tiger with the organ keyboard visible

December 14, 2025 at 7:45 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

If you're based in NL please consider reading & signing our open letter on reclaiming so-called AI from the AI Delta Plan & co:

"Thoughtfully Shaping Our Digital Future" openletter.earth/zorgvuldig-a...

Big thanks to @lekkerresistance.bsky.social @irisvanrooij.bsky.social @marentierra.bsky.social

Thoughtfully Shaping Our Digital Future
To the parties forming the government in the Senate and House of Representatives, as well as the outgoing administration,

We are writing to you in recognition of your crucial responsibility for shaping current and future AI policy, overseeing digitization, and upholding public values. We are a coalition of scientists, experts, and representatives of civil society organizations. We believe it is essential to address these matters together.

This letter has two objectives:

a) Provide context for current plans, including the AI Delta Plan, the AIC4NL position paper, and the Invest-NL AI Deep Dive. These investment proposals often rely on assumptions that lack scientific evidence and do not fully reflect public values.

b) To offer a constructive, well-substantiated alternative approach to digital futures based on people, nature, and democracy. We believe a collaborative process should guide decisions on the needs, scope, and nature of investments by bringing together scientists, civil society organizations, and stakeholders.

December 13, 2025 at 11:12 AM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

I do think some stuff is specifically of a (sub)type, but I 100% agree not disjoint at all

e.g. arxiv.org/abs/2507.19960 bsky.app/profile/oliv...

There it is a definite social relation between [people], that assumes, in their eyes, 454
the fantastic form of a relation between things. In order, therefore, to find an 455
analogy, we must have recourse to the mist-enveloped regions of the religious 456
world. In that world the productions of the human brain appear as independent 457
beings endowed with life, and entering into relation both with one another 458
and the human race. So it is in the world of commodities with the products of 459
[people]’s hands. (Marx, 1867) 460
The reasoning problems become evermore severe in our misunderstandings of these most 461
modern machines (Guest & Martin, 2023). As Taina Bucher (2018, p. 50) explains: “When a 462
machine runs smoothly, nobody pays much attention, and the actors and work required to 463
make it run smoothly disappear from view (Latour, 1999).” A next step in this devolution 464
and devaluation of cognitive labour is that now the user too, deskilled and displaced, also 465
disappears from view. What voice does the human, now reduced to only a user, have if 466
their verbal (column 1, Table 4) and visual (column 2) expressions are just the copy-pasted 467
output of a device that performs patchwork plagiarism? What human connection do they 468
have when their friends and romantic partners have been replaced with inanimate objects 469
(column 3)? 470

December 12, 2025 at 2:50 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Took its sweet time, but absolutely worth it for my Xmas reading! 🤩

@francesegan.bsky.social

doi.org/10.7551/mitp...

Photo of the book deflating mental representation by Frances Egan

December 10, 2025 at 4:35 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

Thanks to you both for being so positive... really means a lot to be honest. I also got a weirdly positive message from His Brittanic Majesty's Revenue and Customs 🙂‍↕️

Weirdest reply! "No,no, we owe you 670 odd quid!" 🤣

Yes, really wanna move back.

Letter from HMRC claiming I owe them 674.40 spondulix like ok m8 whatever

December 8, 2025 at 8:34 PM

Olivia Guest · Ολίβια Γκεστ

@olivia.science

The point isn't assessment standards...

doi.org/10.31234/osf...

we must be critical when we see statements such as: “It’s worth
noting that AI can pass the clinical social worker exam — even
without seeing the questions. But that shows the weaknesses of
exams more than the strength of AI” (Caldwell, 2024, n.p.). An
AI product passing an exam means nothing about the “weak-
nesses” of exams in the abstract. Anybody can ‘win’ a marathon if
driven by car. Does that make it a weakness of the marathon race
as an endurance event? Or does it reflect a deeper category error
on our behalf, like with the misapplication of statistical tests, that
an assumption has been violated? The race as the exam assumes
an unaided human performs it. Any digital computer can sur-
pass a human at many feats, e.g. calculations per second, but that
grants no humanity to the machine.
8 Do not Embrac

December 6, 2025 at 7:34 AM

Add to Home Screen

Light up
your news

Add to Home Screen

Light upyour news

Sign in to Lightnews

Sign up to start reading

Connect Bluesky

Connect with Bluesky

Light up
your news