
Assistant Prof. @UGASchoolofLaw
Athens, GA
Joined June 2019
- Tweets1.9K
- Following764
- Followers421
- Likes6.2K
Pinned Tweet
I’m pleased to share that my article, “Copyright’s Nominal Humanism,” is forthcoming in the Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review.
ssrn.com/abstract=5376145
Cc @UMichLaw, @umichLAMP
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
I absolutely love this. Back in 2008 @zittrain wrote about the future of the internet and how to stop it, arguing that the appliancification of hardware fundamentally limited individual freedom and exposed us to all kinds of extractive corporate practices. This was enshittification before enshittification, completely antithetical to the liberating hacker spirit that birthed personal computing. Seeing people take back control over their hardware makes me very happy. There should be a millennium prize for the first person who does this to a printer.
Removed all of the samsung spyware from my TV with Codex (Claude refused to root the tv lol)
It's insane how much bloat samsung packs into their TVs to track you and sell your data. Here's just some of what I turned off that made my tv 3x faster:
- screenshot your screen a few times a second to see what you're streaming and fingerprint you to sell your data
- reading your hdmi inputs to do the same thing while you have a game console plugged in
- Voice assistants: Bixby wake-word detectors listening and tracking what you say in your house
Before and after speed of my TV:
I liked this essay by @JTasioulas examining such ideas. Unfortunately I don’t think it’s available online.
Generally, we're back to the end of history theses, maybe people will read Kojève or at least Fukuyama, and hopefully do so critically. I've struggled to find any recent good writing on the socialist reception of the post-work ideas or their critique. I've read Morozov's essays
“Greatness of mind becomes an object of love only when the power at work in it itself has a noble character.”
Finally reading the encyclical letter. I think the Pope is an IP minimalist. I don’t know if due to divine or Claude’s inspiration, but I’ll take it.
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
Some revealing statistics on student preparation in today's SF Standard:
- "1,109 incoming freshmen at Berkeley had not met the writing standard"
- This is despite changes to AP cut offs, which increased passage rates by 20%!
- A writing prof at Berkeley says, "students were no better equipped for college-level writing than those at the state university and community college where she previously taught."
- "She recalled one student who couldn’t write in the past tense."
This is relevant for admissions testing: We admit students based on essays, yet, 1/5 arrive unable to satisfy our "entry level" writing requirement! It's past time to bring back a proctored admissions test.
sfstandard.com/2026/10/21/ai…
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
Today we announce new findings from Visiting Fellow David Autor on how AI impacts how professionals build expertise. In a three-month randomized controlled trial with practicing patent attorneys, we test both short-term productivity & longer-term skill building that occur as a result of AI usage. More: goo.gle/4AVeOWf

ALT Estimated impact of AI access on patent drafting and redlining quality. Results are reported for all lawyers (black squares), junior lawyers under 7 years of experience (blue triangles), and senior lawyers with 7+ years of experience (orange diamonds). All estimates account for differences across law firms and adjust for slight variations in how many ratings each lawyer received.
Is this an example of those famous AI hallucinations? I'm finishing a copyright paper and double-checking some of the sources. Here, the USCO cites a source for a proposition that the source explicitly does not support. Why bother?
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
If you're thinking "but I don't know how to do that," just open the Claude desktop app, and type in the box: "Here's a thing someone posted that looks interesting. What do I do?" Give it Dan's link - or a couple of mine: github.com/christortheak/ent…
github.com/christortheak/age…
Law folks: If you’re not using Claude Code or ChatGPT’s Codex, you have no idea what you’re missing. So I’m distributing my research tools that provide a huge boost to legal scholarship. Research assistance, cite-checking, proofreading, and more (thread):
danepps.github.io/legal-rese…
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
This was so foreseeable (indeed my early prediction when ChatGPT came out) but a lot of tech people have a hard time understanding that the hypothetical enriching use of a tech loses out to the lazy corner cutting use 99.9% of the time theguardian.com/technology/2…
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
This is literally an advertisement
Un investigador de Anthropic acaba de decirle a una sala llena de doctorandos que su plan de carrera ya no existe.
La charla se titula "El fin del Antropoceno" y los datos son brutales:
→ El cómputo para entrenar modelos se multiplicó por 10 millones en la última década
→ La duración de las tareas que una IA completa sola se duplica cada pocos meses
→ Desde hace 7 meses los modelos resuelven problemas abiertos de Erdős que los matemáticos no habían logrado cerrar
→ En San Francisco, tener "timelines largos" significa pensar que la AGI llega en 10 años
Su proyección: el cómputo de 2030 será 10.000 veces mayor que el de 2025.
Todavía estamos al principio de la exponencial.
Sus 3 consejos para los estudiantes:
1. Usa la IA cada día. Si estás sobre la exponencial, nunca te quedas atrás de ella.
2. Elige proyectos que mejoren cuando el cómputo escala. El resto quedará resuelto antes de que los termines.
3. Deja de planificar tu carrera como si fuera estable. La opción segura ya no compra seguridad, ya no existe.
Y una frase que resume todo:
"Escribir es pensar. Si externalizas tu escritura, externalizas tu pensamiento."
La charla completa aquí ⬇️
Interesting to see that @JoshFairfield has an entire semester of 1L contracts classes up on Youtube. I wonder how many other classes/professors have done this—not just a single class, but a whole semester. youtube.com/@ProfJoshFairfie…
Last week, I showed my students photos of mummified Bentham and of @KingsCollegeLon students stealing the corpse: kcl.ac.uk/strength-to-streng… I don't think that outraged them all too much—but my explanation of JSM's higher and lower pleasures using Plato and Love Island certainly did
Matt Blaszczyk retweeted
Earlier this week I had the pleasure of giving the annual Welcome Lecture for our new maths & philosophy students at Oxford. I talked about what goes on inside language models, with a focus on mechanistic interpretability (which apparently got on everyone’s radar this week). This felt different from many of the talks I’ve given on the topic before.
I couldn’t help but start by reflecting on what it means to embark on the study of mathematics and philosophy today. It’s easy to look at what’s currently happening in maths, for example, and feel like every academic discipline is about to get steamrolled by thinking machines. There is some truth to that: peer review is already nearing breaking point, as are academic assessment and credit assignment. We urgently need to find new ways to train and evaluate students. We also need to prepare them for a different world, including—and perhaps especially—those who choose to pursue academic careers. A few days ago a PhD student I had only just met asked me whether they should drop out (I advised them not to). Academia aside, the rapid progress of AI raises all sorts of other concerns that our students are legitimately worried about.
At the same time, this is also an incredibly exciting time to learn just about anything and nurture intellectual interests. As I told the students assembled in front of me, there has never been a better time to be a philosopher. This is true in a mundane, self-interested sense: all sorts of new career opportunities are opening up to people with philosophical training. But it's also true in a deeper sense: we will need more philosophers to help us shape the transition to more capable AI and make sense of our role in it. We will especially need philosophers who understand this technology deeply and can offer a positive vision for its future grounded in reality.
I'm less well placed to speak about mathematics, though I certainly understand the frustration, if not outright despair, that some of my colleagues feel when problems to which they have devoted years of work are seemingly solved overnight, to great fanfare, with inscrutable proofs and little understanding gained. But I'm also inspired by the optimism of some of maths' champions; Terry Tao and his vision for Maths 2.0, or @3blue1brown who in a new video echoes my sentiments about philosophy: there has never been a better time to go into maths. I certainly hope that's true! But this will hold true only if we collectively uphold the value of education, mentorship, discussion, and understanding—and if academic institutions can adapt, as they have to many disruptions before. We shouldn't assume that this will happen by default, and we certainly shouldn't stick our heads in the sand.
After the lecture, I stayed to chat with dozens of students for over an hour. What I heard was a mix of curiosity, concern, and enthusiasm, charged with the unmistakable energy of new university students about to start their adult lives. I left the Mathematical Institute feeling grateful and optimistic. I'm sharing this anecdote because the future of academia has been on my mind, and because I know that many students (some of whom may be reading this) have hard questions about the value of higher education and their own prospects. I hope they find some solace in knowing that Faculty members take these questions very seriously.
Aside from the fact this is a good example to discuss in class, it’s the first time I’m hearing about their “business model.” Interesting how easy it is to get a refund of those deposits: teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/thre…
Replying to @SamCKx
This is from the order agreement that requires a $50,000 deposit. "...we cannot guarantee when your vehicle will actually be delivered or if it will be delivered."
I don’t think this is a good account of Dewey’s thinking on legal personhood, but it takes a stab at an interesting part of his work that few lawyers read—the Searlesque social ontology, a theory of social personhood. A good paper could explore how the two (three) relate & cohere



























