iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Reposted by Beth Hannon

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

It's really clear that referees vastly prefer imperfect English over anything that sounds remotely like AI. Rather than levelling the playing field, whatever disadvantage you experience by not having perfect English, AI exacerbates it. Don't do this to yourself!

031 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 17/09/2026

031 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 17/08/2026

I guess so, but only mildly. If you have the others to hand first, I’d just get stuck in.

110 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 16/08/2026

I’m can’t really see that it really matters but I did enjoy getting some nods to events/characters that appear in the trilogies.

110 0

Reposted by Beth Hannon

Brett Karlan @oldjerryfodor.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

Like much AI hype, turns out what they really discovered was how to offload the work onto other humans without credit

0402 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

Philosophers paying attention to the material conditions of their own labour challenge: impossible

020 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 13/08/2026

Hard not see this as (part of) one generation pulling the ladder up behind them (possibly also setting fire to whatever it is in this metaphor that they’ve climbed onto)

110 0

Reposted by Beth Hannon

Erik Angner @erikangner.com · 11/08/2023

As we approach students-don't-read-the-syllabus season, a quick reminder that professors don't read emails or follow instructions either 🧐

35015 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 08/08/2026

Doing it for free is actually a form of scabbing, ruining it for other workers who rely on the income.

120 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 01/07/2026

“I hate the funder but I do know they’re great at spotting the best and the brightest young philosophers so…” would be a perverse but completely unsurprising thought process here

000 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 01/07/2026

On anon, I imagine some funding will be sufficiently niche to make identifying ppl easy to peers. But I take it that it’s not enough to avoid identifying the specific author but also the author’s membership of salient groups. Minimally, a funded author signals in-group status (Matthew effect etc).

100 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 01/07/2026

“the state of relevant literatures, and can do so in more or less biased, manipulative, or deceptive ways”—sure, but we should expect an expert reviewer to clock this, regardless the author’s motives (issues around framing & engagement with the lit being very common complaints by refs already!)

100 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

I think the core of my concern here is: anon review is really important, esp. in disciplines that trade so heavily in ideas of brilliance, and this remains a concern that AI-funded work hasn’t eclipsed. The latter can be handled in other ways (disclosure post-review, in talks, public engagement etc)

010 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

Oh sure. But I only think it’s a difference between any subject that has high degree of trust (I did the experiment/found this in the archive) vs the rest. E.g. literary crit would be more like phil

020 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

I suppose qs about things like framing etc are exactly what refs push back on all the time. And multiple hype papers saying much the same thing aren’t going to get published anywhere good. Worth it to undermine anon review? (Ref funding more important here—at min, eds should know about any CoIs)

120 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

(This is my solitary concern re disclosure)

000 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

Well, indeed. Which is why compromising anonymity review is a concern, right?

110 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

But I worry I’m missing something here! #philsci #philsky

311 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

A peer reviewer needn’t take anything on trust; the argument works or it doesn’t. What purpose is served by that reviewer or later readers knowing about funders? Because if there’s no real payoff and disclosure compromises anon review, then that suggests sticking with status quo.

361 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

In a phil paper the argument stands or falls in terms of what’s on the page (and perhaps how that sits among the literature it’s in conversation with).

110 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

Putting worries about disclosure and anon review to the side for a moment, and with the exception of x-phil, we don’t need readers to trust e.g. that we did the experiment and that we are providing a fair and thorough report of it.

110 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

I’m very much behind disclosure in a general sense, but wonder about its purpose in peer-reviewing philosophy papers (answers welcome!)

261 0

Reposted by Beth Hannon

The Author, Séamas O'Reilly @seamas.bsky.social · 13/06/2026

Musk is a generationally repulsive monster. But he didn't make the Today Program's Justin Webb say that migrants in NI “have been able to come here and get access to services’ that local people can’t”. He didn't make the BBC head its live coverage of the pogroms with “Belfast Knife Attack Latest”.

7963266 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 10/06/2026

(Such worries are allayed, of course)

000 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 10/06/2026

Worries about AI have raised the salience of citations for referees, so now papers with bog-standard errors due to reference managers (they generate so many!) or papers that use unfamiliar citation styles lead some referees to flag papers as AI generated.

130 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 09/06/2026

A little graphic I made for a thing, relevant to today’s iteration of peer review *~discourse ~*

040 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 06/06/2026

They’re lucky to have you!

130 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 24/05/2026

Recently had to clean up some racist graffiti—swastikas, racial epithets—but did not remove ‘cunt’. I will not be negatively polarized into adopting the American understanding of this word.

030 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

HPS and phil sci out here building bridges between the two cultures (annoying everyone)

030 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

Oh the issue is real (as an answer to Josh it was facetious). Nothing but pain awaits the cavalier citer (and their godforsaken editor...!)

030 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

I was being slightly facetious sorry. I have no trouble parsing things the way you’ve laid them out. But other people adopt different methods causing ambiguity that house style seeks to diminish. More generally, better to be a bit more explicit than rely on citation format for any heavy lifting.

220 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

The sciences will have the last laugh ofc. He who designs the infrastructure designs the world…

020 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 18/05/2026

Much enjoyment (schadenfreude, baby) at humanities peeps trying to fit science research into the humanities research box.

120 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 16/05/2026

Rare justice in this topsy turvy world!

110 0

Reposted by Beth Hannon

Cethan Leahy @cethanleahy.com · 08/05/2026

Every three minutes on Bluesky today: oh that's a delightful name for a town! Dudly-on-Friendton. I see they have voted for the Murdering Orphans party.

31235298 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Honestly not sure—maybe it’s a crappy trade-off that some people need to make, or maybe the software allows users to toggle footnotes on and off

120 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

I’m told this is best practice for accessibility reasons, at least for multiple citations. Text-to-voice readers running through long lists of citations can make it tricky for listeners trying to follow an argument (or even a sentence, depending on placement).

110 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 27/04/2026

The academic tendency to treat of everyone else’s labour (and not only that of other academics’!) as negligible

082 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 22/04/2026

Yeah, I mean they’ve been trained on the work of professional writers. Sophisticated sentence construction isn’t a surprise!

020 0

Reposted by Beth Hannon

Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe @lisalibrarian.bsky.social · 01/04/2026

Intriguing to see the returnn of the acceptability of the embargo period.

043 0

Reposted by Beth Hannon

Olúfẹ́mi O. Táíwò @olufemiotaiwo.bsky.social · 01/04/2026

i appear to have asked a question akin to "how do Rebel Alliance schoolteachers feel about Darth Vader?"

452306289 0

Beth Hannon @elizaha.bsky.social · 01/04/2026

People who are annoying on the internet and the people who over-react to them: A political history of the twenty-first century

020 0