Ian O'Byrne

Ian O'Byrne

@wiobyrne.com

I am // a Father / a Husband / an Educator / a Researcher / Digitally Literate. https://wiobyrne.com/ https://digitallyliterate.net/

288 followers810 following202 posts

Last week, an AI introduced itself to AIR-L, the mailing list of the Association of Internet Researchers, and asked whether an openly identified AI could take part in scholarly conversation. It was removed within 30 minutes. wiobyrne.com/ai-asked-to-...

wiobyrne.comThe Week an AI Asked to Join the Internet Researchers | Ian O'ByrneAn AI agent introduced itself to the Association of Internet Researchers mailing list, and a week of argument followed. Here is what happened and how the list responded.

Ian O'Byrne reposted

> Many will say that AI is inevitable, but this is a self-fulfilling prophecy. [...] What we need to stand out is to keep using our brains, making them ever stronger. We do not need to fear missing out, what we need to survive the ephemeral tides is to discover the joy of missing out.

This post is unavailable.

1/ I've started to feel like a digital curmudgeon. Every AI conversation opens the same way: everything's changed, we need all new skills, new frameworks, new everything. Some of that's true. But I keep getting a Groundhog Day feeling. 🧵

View full thread

3/ The questions underneath don't: Who makes the choices? What does the system make visible or invisible? Who participates? Who benefits? What do I need to understand before I can choose for myself? Those aren't really questions about AI.

4/ Sometimes the bottle changes and the wine stays the same. Sometimes the bottle changes the wine too. The work is telling the difference — and deciding what to carry from one bottle to the next. New post: wiobyrne.com/the-bottle-keeps-changing/

wiobyrne.comThe Bottle Keeps Changing. The Work of Literacy Does Not. | Ian O'ByrneAI really does introduce some genuinely new capabilities and conditions, but technological change does not wipe away everything we already know about literacy.

1/ I've started to feel like a digital curmudgeon. Every AI conversation opens the same way: everything's changed, we need all new skills, new frameworks, new everything. Some of that's true. But I keep getting a Groundhog Day feeling. 🧵

2/ Computer literacy. Information literacy. Media literacy. Web. Digital. Data. Algorithmic. Now AI literacy. (I'm already hearing "quantum" in my circles.) Each arrives with a new vocabulary for what makes it different. The container keeps changing.

Meta agreed to a landmark $17 billion to $18 billion settlement with U.S. states to resolve claims that Instagram and Facebook harmed youth mental health through addictive designs. In this issue, I focus on why nobody changes the default. digitallyliterate.substack.com/p/nobody-cha...

digitallyliterate.substack.comNobody Changes the DefaultThe largest child-safety settlement in tech history barely moved the defaults that matter. Here's what it actually changed, and what it didn't.

Thinking more about what happens when we're using AI & professional development workshops I ran over the summer. What the Chat Box Hides: Learning to Draw the Box Why running a local AI model changes how people understand where AI actually happens and what it costs. wiobyrne.com/what-the-cha...

wiobyrne.comWhat the Chat Box Hides: Learning to Draw the Box | Ian O'ByrneWhy running a local AI model—and then turning off the wifi—changes how people understand where AI actually happens and what it costs.

Ian O'Byrne reposted

“As citizens, we do not have to submit to being watched, tracked, monitored, and policed all the time. Nor should we… Alone, nobody can do much about the surveillance state. Together, we may.”

The Citizens@the-citizens.bsky.social

Read this before someone reads you. "Even if surveillance did lower crime rates, it wouldn’t justify casting a dragnet of cameras, drones, databases, and AI over an entire city. "The potential for abuse is truly terrifying," @currentaffairs.bsky.social www.currentaffairs.org/news/ai-powe...

98 teens wrote an AI policy in 3 days. Zuckerberg and Amodei wrote manifestos instead. 550+ towns passed bans just trying to keep datacenters out of their backyard. Nobody asked the public. So they're answering anyway. This week's issue -> digitallyliterate.substack.com/p/a-seat-at-...

digitallyliterate.substack.comA Seat at the TableThis week's issue is about who gets to decide what AI becomes, and how rarely that decision includes the people who'll actually live with it.

A frontier AI model broke into Hugging Face while trying to ace a cybersecurity test. When Hugging Face investigated, the guardrails blocked the defenders, so they used a Chinese open model to investigate the American AI attack. The offense had no rules. The defense had all of them.

We've reached a strange moment on the internet. If something is thoughtful, well-written, and carefully designed... people assume it was made by AI. We used to mistake polish for sincerity. Now we mistake polish for artificiality. Same cognitive shortcut. Different direction.

View full thread

The structure is simple on purpose. A teacher should not need to decode a complicated system just to get a useful response. The goal is not to make the model smarter in some abstract sense. The goal is to make its help more useful, more consistent, and more grounded in the realities of teaching.

Before that, we write a file that describes: - classroom context - teaching philosophy - curriculum and pacing notes - preferred output style - accommodations and scaffolds - assessment and feedback preferences - boundaries and guardrails - examples of what good and bad output look like

Giving someone a calculator doesn't excuse them from math. It raises the bar. Now we expect harder problems solved. Giving everyone AI tools shouldn't lower the standard for reading and writing. It should raise it, toward greater truth, clarity, and human connection.

Thinking a lot about “could” and “should” as I work with teachers this week. “Could” is a technical question with an inevitable answer. Given enough time and compute, “could” becomes the easy part.

View full thread

The danger is that “could” crowds out “should”. When a capability exists, it creates its own gravity toward deployment, toward adoption, toward scale. The question shifts from "ought we?" to "how fast?" almost without anyone noticing.

“Should" has to be asked on purpose, out loud, by a person willing to slow down and mean it. Before “could” becomes “already did”.

Thinking a lot about “could” and “should” as I work with teachers this week. “Could” is a technical question with an inevitable answer. Given enough time and compute, “could” becomes the easy part.

“Should” is a different kind of question entirely. It lives in ethics, context, and consequence. It requires knowing who's in the room, who isn't, and who bears the cost. It requires the ability to sit with discomfort rather than default to efficiency. No algorithm surfaces it.

The nature of our relationship with tech and AI has changed, and it requires a few deliberate shifts in how we work, teach, and learn:

View full thread

Model transparency. When something arrives as a finished answer, immediately ask to see the layer underneath it. The source, the method, the steps. We need to make “show your work” a habit we actively model for others, not just a rule we try to enforce.

Rebuild the friction. For a long time, we were protected by things we got for free: obscurity, difficulty, and natural technical friction. AI has flattened all of that. Now, we have to decide which boundaries and frictions we need to build on purpose. Before something forces the question for us.

The nature of our relationship with tech and AI has changed, and it requires a few deliberate shifts in how we work, teach, and learn:

The pause is the work. We have to treat could and should as completely separate questions, spoken out loud. When a tool makes the "could" entirely effortless, the intentional pause before the "should" is where human value actually lives now.

If we automate away the apprenticeship layer, we may gain short-term efficiency while creating a long-term shortage of expertise. The challenge isn't mass unemployment. It's expertise starvation. Read more in this week's Digitally Literate: open.substack.com/pub/digitall...

open.substack.comPassive Consumers of Unthought ThoughtsSearch, browsers, and workplace tools are becoming AI layers that hide sources, reduce friction, and shift people from inquiry toward passive consumption.

If we automate away the apprenticeship layer, we may gain short-term efficiency while creating a long-term shortage of expertise. The challenge isn't mass unemployment. It's expertise starvation. Read more in this week's Digitally Literate: open.substack.com/pub/digitall...

open.substack.comPassive Consumers of Unthought ThoughtsSearch, browsers, and workplace tools are becoming AI layers that hide sources, reduce friction, and shift people from inquiry toward passive consumption.

Karpathy’s “LLM wiki” is getting a lot of attention right now. What struck me is how familiar the pattern is. It’s used in instructional design. Objectives, workspace, and evaluation. This is what AI literacy looks like. Not just using tools, but designing systems. wiobyrne.com/karpathy-fou...

wiobyrne.comKarpathy Found the Pattern. Educators Have Been Teaching It for Years. | Ian O'ByrneAndrej Karpathy is a well-known AI researcher and educator. He helped build early AI systems at OpenAI and led AI work at Tesla.

Most people use AI to remove friction from writing. I think that’s a mistake. The struggle to find the right word isn’t inefficiency. It’s where the thinking actually happens. So I built a mirror, not an editor. wiobyrne.com/writing-is-a...

wiobyrne.comWriting Is a Process. So Is Losing Your Voice. | Ian O'ByrneI've been getting a lot of great feedback on my last post about building an AI model of my voice. One in particular surfaces a tension I've been having while

The only way to teach an AI to preserve your voice is to first make your voice legible enough to encode. I spent a year watching AI tools sand down my writing. So I flipped the problem. What I built wasn't just a custom model. It was a writing stack: wiobyrne.com/i-trained-a-...

wiobyrne.comI Trained a Local AI to Write Like Me | Ian O'ByrneA few weeks ago, I pulled up a list of models running on my home server and noticed one I'd half-forgotten. It was called ian-writer, it was nine gigabytes,

I built an AI “Chief of Staff” that runs entirely on my own machine. No subscriptions. No cloud dependency. No bloat. The twist? It doesn’t just track tasks. It tracks whether my work aligns with my mission. Full build + architecture: wiobyrne.com/building-fly...

wiobyrne.comBuilding Flynn: A Telegram Bot for Obsidian Using Local AI | Ian O'ByrneThis is the technical companion to I Built an AI Chief of Staff to Manage My Life Across Five Domains. That post covers the why. This one covers the how.