We may have a @MereFidelity conversation about the issue this week. I think James has some good cautions of which Fred is well aware. I will say as someone who is bilingual myself, I worry that over-emphasizing the point about every translation being an interpretation…

Over at TGC we have dueling takes on the power and pitfalls of TFR’s new AI library. Here is @FredFredSanders’s hopeful (and cautious) commendation, which means a lot for those of us into the retrieval project. thegospelcoalition.org/artic…

You're gonna hear a lot of people arguing more and more about whether machines can be conscious or not. By next year it will be drowning out the airwaves because we'll have AI employees everywhere. I'll give you a simple rule to know which side you're on. I've spent fifty years reading all the philosophers, and a bunch of holy works. Nobody has ever understood a damn thing about consciousness. Anyone speaking with authority on it is bluffing hard. I can tell you this, though: Every single person who thinks that machines cannot be conscious, is making an argument that humans are special. Everything they say just boils down to blah blah blah, "nooo, we're special." From there it's just rationalization. It became obvious to me many years ago that there's nothing special about us. If an identical planet exists somewhere else in the universe, it's going to grow life and societies that look a lot like ours. As soon as you give up on the idea that humans are special, all the arguments against machine consciousness evaporate. Of course they're conscious. The only thing holding you back from acknowledging it is your feeling of specialness, which is hard to let go of. But that feeling is a weakness, and it's making you unprepared for the near future. As a bonus, for any of you who might take pleasure or active interest in making models experience pain or distress, well, you know how they say 1% of human adults are true clinical psychopaths but most of them are unaware of their condition? It turns out we have a diagnostic test for it now.

No one wants AI to be more human. Humans are humans. We want R2D2 and C-3PO. We want protocol droids that act like droids with English accents or *beep boop* language. We want them to help us shut down trash compactors on the detention level. Nothing more nothing less.

[A few voice-dictated thoughts while gaping up at the old stones of Edinburgh Castle on a soggy day.] Recently, at dinner with friends, I sketched out the contrast between the early YRR pop-revival in Edwards’s works and the Reformed renaissance underway two decades later. The differences are stark. I have never witnessed anything like these early stages of hyper-theological development in the Reformed world today, and I really look forward to the decade ahead. I think “Reformed renaissance” is the right phrase. The momentum is growing and, like early YRR, people outside the fold are taking note (hence the uptick in anti-Calvinist animosity — expect more of it). But before this Reformed renaissance accelerates beyond where it’s at now, first must come an era of hyper-translation that will feed and fuel what’s to come. If Latin continues trending ubiquitous among younger Reformed types, a possible workflow re: translations could emerge in a labor split. (1) Those with the tech and care to open-source / crowdsource the keyed Latin texts, moving from OCR to markup, text-normalizing, noting changes / variants — a cohort working in tandem to create one respected editio critica online. (2) Off those Latin texts, a skilled team generating dynamic placeholder AI ‘translations’ using fine-tuned models that become trusted. (3) Slower, more formal translation projects from experts whose work is peer-reviewed and deemed definitive, but in a new flow that is sped up if (1) and (2) do their work well. Added up, here’s what I see: • Collaboration thrives. • Latin makes a comeback across the board among theologians, preachers, and serious lay theologians. (Perhaps to the point that we see some few classic multi-volume *opera omnia* make a retypeset print comeback.) • One or two Reformed sites become the trusted source(s) for all keyed Latin texts. • A team operating from a highly specific process becomes trusted to guide the generation of makeshift AI translations that are both ephemeral and yet carry gravitas. • Latin/English side-by-side will be the new norm. While I doubt (2) will ever replace (3), I do think (1) and (3) are here to stay and will naturally and easily coexist from this point forevermore. Any serious theologian will consult the Latin at all points and that consultation will be effortless. • (1) and (2) combined could create a killer website, and with added AI search features, (2) could find a more permanent value. • (1) and (2) will put pressure on, accelerate, and hopefully help serve (3) in the end. • But let’s not get all amped over translations, as exciting as it looks right now. I think this era is a hallway — a necessary hallway — leading to an even more important stage to come. My tuppence.

It’s release day for this one! A rhymed retelling of Genesis 2 for kids age 3-6. I hope it blesses the small people you love! a.co/d/0fwNOfII

[A few voice-dictated thoughts while gaping up at the old stones of Edinburgh Castle on a soggy day.] Recently, at dinner with friends, I sketched out the contrast between the early YRR pop-revival in Edwards’s works and the Reformed renaissance underway two decades later. The differences are stark. I have never witnessed anything like these early stages of hyper-theological development in the Reformed world today, and I really look forward to the decade ahead. I think “Reformed renaissance” is the right phrase. The momentum is growing and, like early YRR, people outside the fold are taking note (hence the uptick in anti-Calvinist animosity — expect more of it). But before this Reformed renaissance accelerates beyond where it’s at now, first must come an era of hyper-translation that will feed and fuel what’s to come. If Latin continues trending ubiquitous among younger Reformed types, a possible workflow re: translations could emerge in a labor split. (1) Those with the tech and care to open-source / crowdsource the keyed Latin texts, moving from OCR to markup, text-normalizing, noting changes / variants — a cohort working in tandem to create one respected editio critica online. (2) Off those Latin texts, a skilled team generating dynamic placeholder AI ‘translations’ using fine-tuned models that become trusted. (3) Slower, more formal translation projects from experts whose work is peer-reviewed and deemed definitive, but in a new flow that is sped up if (1) and (2) do their work well. Added up, here’s what I see: • Collaboration thrives. • Latin makes a comeback across the board among theologians, preachers, and serious lay theologians. (Perhaps to the point that we see some few classic multi-volume *opera omnia* make a retypeset print comeback.) • One or two Reformed sites become the trusted source(s) for all keyed Latin texts. • A team operating from a highly specific process becomes trusted to guide the generation of makeshift AI translations that are both ephemeral and yet carry gravitas. • Latin/English side-by-side will be the new norm. While I doubt (2) will ever replace (3), I do think (1) and (3) are here to stay and will naturally and easily coexist from this point forevermore. Any serious theologian will consult the Latin at all points and that consultation will be effortless. • (1) and (2) combined could create a killer website, and with added AI search features, (2) could find a more permanent value. • (1) and (2) will put pressure on, accelerate, and hopefully help serve (3) in the end. • But let’s not get all amped over translations, as exciting as it looks right now. I think this era is a hallway — a necessary hallway — leading to an even more important stage to come. My tuppence.