(sorry, this is NOT about crystallography!) hello diana, oh yes, as i see, you are right that the book was published in the USA. however, zuckerberg certainly tried to block publication, was successful in gagging wynn-williams from promoting it and, apparently, requiring her to "halt further distribution of the book to the extent within her control". this was on the basis of an emergency arbitration ruling issued under the non-disparagement clause from her severance agreement with meta. i had thought that its publication by macmillan in the UK had been to avoid liability. as it turned out though, king zuckerberg's attitudes were left naked and the book was a best-seller anyhow. however, in the arbitration zuckerberg also forced wynn-williams to stop even mentioning anything in the book or making any other negative comments about meta. i expect that too was part of the severance agreement that she was required to sign (i wonder what the alternative was?). hello adrian, oh yes, i certainly did read the book – and was horrified (especially regarding the exploitation of minors and the collaboration with election campaigns worldwide). probably even zuckerberg thinks that i shouldn't have been, as he's quoted as saying that most of the content was public already. it's strange, then, that he was so concerned that wynn-williams might make it even more so!
cheers jon From: Diana Tomchick <[email protected]> Sent: Montag, 26. Januar 2026 18:25 To: [email protected]; Hughes, Jon <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] AI AI sir! Meta's suit of Sarah Wynn-Williams was unsuccessful—I've read "Careless People" and it was also a bestseller in the US. Diana ************************************************** Diana R. Tomchick Professor Departments of Biophysics and Biochemistry UT Southwestern Medical Center 5323 Harry Hines Blvd. Rm. ND10.214A Dallas, TX 75390-8816 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> (214) 645-6383 (phone) (214) 645-6353 (fax) ________________________________ From: CCP4 bulletin board <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Hughes, Jon <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2026 6:13 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] AI AI sir! hi adrian, exactly: it's the missing liability that makes all this so profitable. the EU could change that just by snapping its fingers! if mr. freedom-of-speech zuckerberg SUCCESSFULLY blocked sarah wynn-williams's publication of "careless hi adrian, exactly: it's the missing liability that makes all this so profitable. the EU could change that just by snapping its fingers! if mr. freedom-of-speech zuckerberg SUCCESSFULLY blocked sarah wynn-williams's publication of "careless people" (at least in the USA), anyone can do it, right?! ✊ jon Am 25.01.2026 16:31 schrieb "Goldman, Adrian" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>: I think it really depends on use case. It’s extremely good at removing english language mistakes, for instance. But at heart it’s a statistical model, right? What word is likely to follow ‘what’ in a sentence about ChatGPT, for instance. Like my last. The likelihood of painterly is very close to zero, but is, word, token have all got high probabilities. So for things it should be good at - it really is good. That doesn’t include facts: the intersection of words with the world. chatgpt5 does facts slightly better than chatgpt2. I remember asking it for sonnets and 2 hadn’t got a concept of sonnet - but 3+ do. You’ll get 14 lines in one of the classic sonnet rhyme patterns in iambic pentameter. But don’t worry it’s going to take over the world. Sam Altman says so. [cid:230B0900-23E1-4D47-B645-2F4C071295E6]<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/jan/25/sam-altman-openai__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAPC78xts$> Sam Altman’s make-or-break year: can the OpenAI CEO cash in his bet on the future?<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/jan/25/sam-altman-openai__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAPC78xts$> theguardian.com<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2026/jan/25/sam-altman-openai__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAPC78xts$> You know the real problem with the enshitification of the internet is legal liability. If meta, OpenAI, Google, TikTok, x etc had the same legal liabilities as publishers, they would stop producing and distributing crap because otherwise they would be sued out of existence. Adrian Sent from my iPhone On 25 Jan 2026, at 16:24, Harry Powell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I read this yesterday - https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/24/latest-chatgpt-model-uses-elon-musks-grokipedia-as-source-tests-reveal<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/24/latest-chatgpt-model-uses-elon-musks-grokipedia-as-source-tests-reveal__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAjnoOH7I$> And this (and similar articles) a while back - https://grokipediawiki.com/analysis/plagiarism-scandal-investigation/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/grokipediawiki.com/analysis/plagiarism-scandal-investigation/__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aA0S-JcVU$> These don’t inspire me to use either. Harry On 25 Jan 2026, at 13:17, Hughes, Jon <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: hi, there has been much talk of using AI to write code for us and of it making the world better. people in this group have their own opinions regarding alphafold, for example, but at a much simpler level, i just asked chatGTP something about electrical power generation: his/her/their answer finally included, ""Interpretation per joule: 4–12 €cents per kWh equals 4–12 × 10⁻⁶ € per joule, since 1 kWh = 3.6 MJ". well, we all make mistakes, right?! cheers, jon ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAoJ4Rx1k$> This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAvgjLxN4$>, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk<https://urldefense.com/v3/__http:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAOdIFd5I$>, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAFmdhEaY$> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAoJ4Rx1k$> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAoJ4Rx1k$> ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1__;!!MznTZTSvDXGV0Co!G4jcwrk20ewhSAHVMxmZOpo-tuPfA15BscVHzv-x6xTJnfyCh4QHdv87QRp4RRyggq2XL-HFuBmmcxgoO1qV-_ZaPhvWU53anNZZG1aAoJ4Rx1k$> ________________________________ UT Southwestern Medical Center The future of medicine, today. ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
