Imaginez un monde dans lequel, au moment même où une régulation du tabac était débattue au parlement européen, les plateaux télé, les radios et les journaux invitaient systématiquement le directeur de la recherche de Philip Morris, en le présentant comme un pionnier scientifique de la chimie des nouvelles générations de cigarettes. Omettant d’évoquer sa casquette industrielle et ses conflits d’intérêts, les journalistes le questionneraient sur l’avenir de la cigarette, les enjeux sur la compétitivité économique du pays et les régulations adéquates.
Veille - avril 2025
Vous êtes ici
16 activistes climat relaxé·es au nom de « l’état de nécessité » : une victoire qui fait date
It seems that the more people learn about Musk, the less they like him—at least, according to a new Hart Research survey published Wednesday by Groundwork Collective and Public Citizen. The poll asked respondents about how much influence they felt Musk should have in government, explaining aspects of his role in DOGE, his lack of oversight, and his far-reaching access.
By the end of the survey, 63 percent of voters reported having an unfavorable opinion of Musk, an increase of nine points from the beginning of the survey. Meanwhile, only 32 percent of respondents had a favorable opinion, which was down 7 percent from the start, and showed a major negative swing among non-MAGA Republicans.
La désinformation en ligne fait partie intégrante de la stratégie des extrêmes droites, tandis que les formations de gauche, qu’elles soient radicales, écologistes ou sociales-démocrates, ont moins recours à cette pratique, selon une étude récente réalisée par des universitaires néerlandais.
Ce type d’intervention politique sur les archives n’a rien d’anodin. L’histoire regorge d’exemples où la manipulation ou la destruction d’archives a servi des régimes autoritaires. De l’Allemagne nazie à l’Union soviétique, en passant par la Révolution culturelle chinoise et le régime des Khmers rouges, les archives ont toujours représenté un enjeu de pouvoir majeur. L’accès à une information libre, fiable et contextualisée est une menace pour ceux qui cherchent à réécrire l’histoire à leur avantage.
Quoi de plus neutre, dit-on, qu’un ordinateur ? Erreur : derrière leurs verdicts froids, algorithmes et automates encapsulent tous les biais des humains qui les conçoivent. Basée sur le modèle de l’individu calculateur, héritière d’une histoire tissée de choix idéologiques, l’intelligence artificielle est une machine politique. La mettre au service du bien commun implique d’abord de la déconstruire.
For its right wing adherents, the absence of humans is a feature, not a bug, of AI art. Where mechanically-produced art used to draw attention to its artificiality – think the mass-produced modernism of the Bauhaus (which the Nazis repressed and the AfD have condemned), or the music of Kraftwerk – AI art pretends to realism. It can produce art the way right wingers like it: Thomas Kinkade paintings, soulless Dreamworks 3D cartoons, depthless imagery that yields only the reading that its creator intended. And, vitally, it can do so without the need for artists.
Javier Milei, a prodigious user of AI-generated art, wants Argentinians to know that any of them could join the 265,000, mostly young people who have lost jobs as a result of the recession that he induced, to the rapturous praise of economic elites. He wants to signal that anyone can find themselves at the wrong end of his chainsaw, even if doing so means producing laughably bad graphics for the consumption of his 5.9 million deeply uncritical Instagram followers.
C’était il y a 24 ans. Le 15 Janvier 2001 naissait Wikipédia. dans un monde numérique où Google était lui-même né en 1998 et le web encore quelques années avant (disons vers 1991 pour faire simple même si sa date de naissance officielle est plutôt en Mars 1989).
A l’image d’une chanson de Cabrel, elle a en effet dû faire toutes les guerres pour être si forte aujourd’hui. Et aujourd’hui encore elle est la cible d’une offensive coordonnée qui va des USA jusqu’à la France. Une offensive d’une violence et d’une portée rarement atteinte. Avec en tête un Musk qui rêve de sonner l’Hallali de l’encyclopédie.
Fascist movements, formal or otherwise, operate much like cults. When one joins them, they are at first overwhelmed with the appearance of validation and support. This is called "love bombing" and it's meant to endear you to them, to become dependent on them to meet your emotional needs. Then that validation and support is gradually withheld in order to pressure the target into severing ties with the "normie" world. They drive away anyone outside of their hateful little bubble. So their entire network of social support depends on how useful they can be to the cause. It's the only way they can feel part of something anymore because nobody else wants anything to do with them at this point.
Kennedy exploits the language of the "wellness" industry, with its misleading emphasis on "natural" health care and "letting" your body heal itself. What's ironic is that's what vaccines do. Vaccines work by stimulating the body's natural immune response, so that it prevents infection using the body's own resources. All these "treatments" Kennedy touts aren't just ineffective, they're not "natural." They're blitzing a child with often overwhelming amounts of medication, which won't work but could make the kid even sicker.
“Much of what I did I now regret,” Bill Burr told The Wall Street Journal recently, admitting that his research into passwords mostly came from a white paper written in the 1980s, well before the web was even invented. “In the end, [the list of guidelines] was probably too complicated for a lot of folks to understand very well, and the truth is, it was barking up the wrong tree.”
It's not a history you learn about in school—we were whitewashing history long before the current executive orders—but the Klan in the '20s was everywhere. There were millions of Klan members across the country. People joined it like they were joining a golf club or the Elks Lodge. There was a women's auxiliary. There was the Ku Klux Kiddies, for children. Klan rallies were held across the country; thousands would turn up at fairgrounds for the marching bands and cross burnings. In 1925, the Klan even held a march down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington DC. Tens of thousands strong, crowds were six deep in the streets to watch and cheer. They did it again the next year.
"We're in the very early days looking at this problem from an ecosystem level," Larson told The Register. "It's difficult, and likely impossible, to quantify how many attempted installs are happening because of LLM hallucinations without more transparency from LLM providers. Users of LLM generated code, packages, and information should be double-checking LLM outputs against reality before putting any of that information into operation, otherwise there can be real-world consequences."
[...]
"Even worse, when you Google one of these slop-squatted package names, you’ll often get an AI-generated summary from Google itself confidently praising the package, saying it’s useful, stable, well-maintained. But it’s just parroting the package’s own README, no skepticism, no context. To a developer in a rush, it gives a false sense of legitimacy.
TL;DR: I chose to make using AI a manual action, because I felt the slow loss of competence over time when I relied on it, and I recommend everyone to be cautious with making AI a key part of their workflow.
If you take just one thing away from this article, I want it to be this: please build your own website. A little home on the independent web.
A reflection of your personality in HTML and CSS (and a little bit of JS, as a treat). This could be a professional portfolio, listing your accomplishments. It might be a blog where you write about things that matter to you. It could even be something very weird and pointless (even better) – I love a good single-joke website. Ultimately, it's your space and you can do whatever you want with it.
Nous avons récemment consacré un petit billet au cas particulier d’Alain Bentolila : cet ancien professeur d’université inonde les médias d’une intox sur des jeunes qui « vivraient avec 400 mots » ou 500, ou 800, tout en sachant pertinemment que cela est faux (billet ici).
Mais il n’est pas le seul à véhiculer des chiffres fantaisistes sur la taille du vocabulaire, et plutôt que vous laisser observer des guerres de chiffres invérifiables, on vous propose de prendre les choses en mains et vérifier par vous-mêmes. Ce n’est pas si compliqué, on vous donne toutes les billes ici et en quelques minutes vous serez autonomes.
The effects of AI on cognitive development are already being identified in schools across the United States. In a report titled, “Generative AI Can Harm Learning”, researchers at the University of Pennsylvania found that students who relied on AI for practice problems performed worse on tests compared to students who completed assignments without AI assistance. This suggests that the use of AI in academic settings is not just an issue of convenience, but may be contributing to a decline in critical thinking skills.
The verdict is in: OpenAI's newest and most capable traditional AI model, GPT-4.5, is big, expensive, and slow, providing marginally better performance than GPT-4o at 30x the cost for input and 15x the cost for output. The new model seems to prove that longstanding rumors of diminishing returns in training unsupervised-learning LLMs were correct and that the so-called "scaling laws" cited by many for years have possibly met their natural end.
For years now, many AI industry watchers have looked at the quickly growing capabilities of new AI models and mused about exponential performance increases continuing well into the future. Recently, though, some of that AI "scaling law" optimism has been replaced by fears that we may already be hitting a plateau in the capabilities of large language models trained with standard methods.
Climate change is one of the instances, Stiglitz and Stern told me in an email, in which “it is generally agreed there is extreme risk — we know there are some really extreme events that could occur — and we know we cannot pretend (i.e., act as if) we know the probabilities. Nordhaus’s work doesn’t appropriately take into account either extreme risk or deep uncertainty.”
In other words, the economist who has been embraced as a guiding light by the global institution tasked with shepherding humanity through the climate crisis, who has been awarded a Nobel for climate costing, who is widely feted as the doyen of his field, doesn’t know what he’s talking about.