theshaper

> I'm not sure why you say it's a scandal. The author worked with the publishing company from the start, and from the start the intention was to "unveil" the truth to make an impact.

That just means he didn’t lie alone. They lied as a group. They lied to the newspapers that interviewed Jianwei Xun, they lied to the bookstores that sold a non-existent author, they lied to readers and academics, they violated the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, which considers it a serious offense to fail to label AI-generated text, video, or audio. The book doesn’t clarify this in any of its editions.[1]

I get your point about the marketing strategy. That doesn’t change the fact that it was a lie.

Several newspapers have already retracted or pulled their original articles about the “clever stunt” by the Italian author. New spanish editions will now include an explanation of the actual writing process (with AI), as well as the mixed identity behind the author's name.[2]

A scandal.

And yes, I think the experiment is interesting. But they lied, not just my opinion. That’s what every newspapers who interviewed a ghost is now saying.

> According to interviews, he used AI platforms in a very specific way that couldn't be called "vibe philosophizing"

I was referring to the intellectuals now justifying the experiment of working with AI. (They’ve basically discovered “vibe philosophizing”) I wasn’t referring to him. He clearly knew what he was doing.

> It seems he treated the AI as a mirror instead of a system that would give him answers.

Right. Except… I’m not the one saying:

- “Jianwei Xun emerged in late 2024 as a distributed philosophical entity born from the collaborative interaction between human intelligence and artificial intelligence systems.”

- “Xun's true nature as a hybrid intellectual construct…”

That’s from the author’s own official page.[3]

[1] https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun... [2] https://www.lanacion.com.ar/tecnologia/jianwei-xun-autor-de-... [3] https://jianweixun.com/

Funny how what the book talks about… is exactly what’s happening. Kind of meta.

The author doesn’t exist. The whole essay is fake—or a “philosophical experiment”[1], according to Andrea Colamedici, the real italian author behind it, who was supposedly just the translator. And those words aren’t his either. They came from two AI platforms (still unnamed).

It’s been a scandal in publishing, and in all the universities and newspapers that praised it as a fresh way to understand the present.

Now, of course, intellectuals and journalists are justifying “the intellectual debate the book sparked”, asking if these new “philosophical entities” are the start of a new wave of “hybrid works...” and so on.

Well. They’ve basically discovered "vibe philosophizing": feeling deep truths without knowing where they come from or why they sound right.

[1] More: https://english.elpais.com/technology/2025-04-07/jianwei-xun...

OMG! ੧[⁰o⁰]ʋ

Thanks!

Hey! Opino lo mismo!

(I agree!)

Let me give you some probably bad advice. Skip the Johnny Truant parts and skim past all the creative layout stuff. It's just decoration, and decoration is often suspicious. Focus on the core story. It’s fantastic. There’s a shot at building a full-on American mythology, Lovecraft-style, from that alone.

Sadly, almost no one talks about it. Ditch the form and embrace the substance. ← It also nods to the mystery behind The Navidson Record.

I wish I had known this when I first read it.

You're going to like this article about The Land, in Wales:

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/03/europe...

(https://archive.is/3Jp3W)

I understand the hook of these articles; not just from that site, but from almost the entire publishing industry and the allure of OpenAI. But we’re reaching strange new levels. What’s next? OpenAI is Númenor, OpenAI is Windows Vista, OpenAI is John Carter, OpenAI is Fyre Festival...

:)

Not exactly, but...

Amazing mind reader reveals his 'gift':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7pYHN9iC9I

Update: "Journal that published faulty black plastic study removed from science index"

https://arstechnica.com/health/2024/12/journal-that-publishe...

"Awoken By A Lamp" vibes, definitely:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Glitch_in_the_Matrix/comments/30t9k...

Thanks for share.

In twenty years, we'll probably see the same phenomenon with 'abandoned Data Centers.' Teenagers will head to these old buildings in small groups, looking for the ghostly Sysadmin who killed his family because the AI in his neural link told him to.

In addition, the On Call section has just completed its 500th issue:

https://www.theregister.com/2024/09/15/on_call_500_columns_c...

You reminded me of this short film by Sean Buckelew:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RubSLGTrdOA

But what about second breakfast?

I'm late, but just came by to say thanks for the comment.

A baby custobot!

Colin Wright joke from ten years ago[1]:

There are 10 kinds of people in the world, those that understand binary, those that don't, and those that didn't expect this joke to be in ternary.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7036546

I'm with you.

It has even happened to Buffet. Regarding the sale of his shares in Paramount:

“Actually, owning Paramount made me think even deeper, but I certainly looked harder about the whole question of what people do with their leisure time and what the governing principles are of running an entertainment business of any sort, whether it’s sports or movies or whatever it might be,” Buffett said. “I think I’m smarter now than I was a couple years ago, but I also think I’m poorer because I acquired the knowledge in the manner I did.” ← great quote

Source: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/war...

Your opinion doesn't seem fair to Nvidia.

>Nvidia as the most valuable company in the world?

This could just as easily be written as:

Apple as the most valuable company in the world?

Microsoft as the most valuable company in the world?

Tesla as the most valuable company in the world?

I won't be the one to defend Nvidia, but I don't find any solid arguments to consider its business model worse or better than those of the 'other' IT companies.

At this point, Terence Tao is already worthy of a list of facts, much like those about Chuck Norris and Bruce Schneier.

For example:

When Terence Tao solves a problem, the problem appreciates the solution.

OSI is in the stage of gathering opinions to find an appropriate definition:

https://thenewstack.io/open-source-ai-osi-wrestles-with-a-de...

Because...

Aquí:

https://borgestodoelanio.blogspot.com/2017/05/jorge-luis-bor...

Wikipedia, Archive.org, etc.

Maybe "generating revenue" doesn't apply exactly, but...