An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: "Do not use semicolons," wrote Kurt Vonnegut, who averaged fewer than 30 a novel (about one every 10 pages). "All they do is show you've been to college." A study suggests UK authors are taking Vonnegut's advice to heart; the semicolon seems to be in terminal decline, with its usage in English books plummeting by almost half in two decades -- from one appearing in every 205 words in 2000 to one use in every 390 words today. Further research by Lisa McLendon, author of The Perfect English Grammar Workbook, found 67% of British students never or rarely use the semicolon. Just 11% of respondents described themselves as frequent users. Linguistic experts at the language learning software Babbel, which commissioned the original research, were so struck by their findings that they asked McLendon to give the 500,000-strong London Student Network a 10-question multiple-choice quiz on the semicolon. She found more than half of respondents did not know or understand how to use it. As defined by the Oxford Dictionary of English, the semicolon is "a punctuation mark indicating a pause, typically between two main clauses, that is more pronounced than that indicated by a comma." It is commonly used to link together two independent but related clauses, and is particularly useful for juxtaposition or replacing confusing extra commas in lists where commas already exist -- or where a comma would create a splice. The Guardian has a semicolon quiz at the end of the article where you can test your semicolon knowledge.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: On Sunday, the Chicago Sun-Times published an advertorial summer reading list containing at least 10 fake books attributed to real authors, according to multiple reports on social media. The newspaper's uncredited "Summer reading list for 2025" supplement recommended titles including "Tidewater Dreams" by Isabel Allende and "The Last Algorithm" by Andy Weir -- books that don't exist and were created out of thin air by an AI system. The creator of the list, Marco Buscaglia, confirmed to 404 Media (paywalled) that he used AI to generate the content. "I do use AI for background at times but always check out the material first. This time, I did not and I can't believe I missed it because it's so obvious. No excuses," Buscaglia said. "On me 100 percent and I'm completely embarrassed." A check by Ars Technica shows that only five of the fifteen recommended books in the list actually exist, with the remainder being fabricated titles falsely attributed to well-known authors. [...] On Tuesday morning, the Chicago Sun-Times addressed the controversy on Bluesky. "We are looking into how this made it into print as we speak," the official publication account wrote. "It is not editorial content and was not created by, or approved by, the Sun-Times newsroom. We value your trust in our reporting and take this very seriously. More info will be provided soon." In the supplement, the books listed by authors Isabel Allende, Andy Weir, Brit Bennett, Taylor Jenkins Reid, Min Jin Lee, Percival Everett, Delia Owens, Rumaan Alam, Rebecca Makkai, and Maggie O'Farrell are confabulated, while books listed by authors Francoise Sagan, Ray Bradbury, Jess Walter, Andre Aciman, and Ian McEwan are real. All of the authors are real people. "The Chicago Sun-Times obviously gets ChatGPT to write a 'summer reads' feature almost entirely made up of real authors but completely fake books. What are we coming to?" wrote novelist Rachael King. A Reddit user also expressed disapproval of the incident. "As a subscriber, I am livid! What is the point of subscribing to a hard copy paper if they are just going to include AI slop too!? The Sun Times needs to answer for this, and there should be a reporter fired."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Amazon's Audible is expanding its audiobook offerings by giving select publishers access to its AI-powered production tools that will let them more easily convert books into audiobooks with over 100 customizable AI voices to choose from. It will also launch an AI translation tool in beta later this year to help publishers translate and localize audiobooks into multiple languages, with both automated and human-assisted options. The Verge reports: Audible says its new AI narration technology leverages Amazon's advanced AI capabilities and will be made available to interested publishing partners in the coming months in one of two ways. For publishers wanting to be hands-off, an end-to-end service managed by Audible handles the "entire audiobook production process" right up to publication, while a self-service option will give publishers access to the same tools so they can independently direct the entire production process. With both options, publishers are able to "choose from a quickly growing and improving selection of more than 100 AI-generated voices across English, Spanish, French, and Italian with multiple accent and dialect options, and will be able to access voice upgrades for their titles as our technology evolves," according to Amazon. [...] Publishers will also be able to review translations themselves or opt for a human review through Audible with a professional linguist.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

Its goal was to "support workers to reclaim the power of future-making". A 2022 pilot project saw over 25 Amazon workers meeting online "to discuss how science fiction shed light on their working conditions and futures." 13 of them then continued meeting regularly in 2023 with the "Worker as Futurist" project (funded by Canada's Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, according to an article by the project's leaders in the socialist magazine Jacobin). "Our team of scholars, teachers, writers, and activists has been able to pay Amazon workers (warehouse workers, drivers, copy editors, MTurk workers, and more) to participate in a series of skill-building writing workshops and information sessions...." And when it was over, "the participants were supported to draft the stories they wanted to tell about The World After Amazon...." Six months ago they held the big launch event for the book's print edition, while also promising that "you can read the workers' stories online, or download the book as a PDF or an ebook, all for free." The Amazon-worker stories have tempting titles like "The Museum of Prime", "The Dark Side of Convenience", and even "The Iron Uprising." ("In a dystopian future of corporate power, humans and robots come together in resistance and in love.") And the project also created a 13-episode podcast offering "interviews with experts on Amazon, activists and organizers, science fiction writers and others dedicated to reclaiming the future from corporate control." As they wrote in Jacbon: This isn't finding individual commercial or literary success, but dignity, imagination, and common struggle... Our "Worker as Futurist" project returns the power of the speculative to workers, in the name of discovering something new about capitalism and the struggle for something different... We must envision the futures we want in order to mobilize and fight for them together, rather than cede that future to those who would turn the stars into their own private sandbox... The rank-and-file worker — the target of daily exploitation, forced to build their boss's utopia — may have encrypted within them the key to destroying his world and building a new one.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

In February tech journalist Nicholas Carr published Superbloom: How Technologies of Connection Tear Us Apart. A University of Virginia academic journal says the book "appraises the past and present" of information technology while issuing "a warning about its future." And specifically Carr argues that the government ignored historic precedents by not regulating the early internet sometime in the 1990s. But as he goes on to remind us, the early 1990s were also when the triumphalism of America's Cold War victory, combined with the utopianism of Silicon Valley, convinced a generation of decision-makers that "an unfettered market seemed the best guarantor of growth and prosperity" and "defending the public interest now meant little more than expanding consumer choice." So rather than try to anticipate the dangers and excesses of commercialized digital media, Congress gave it free rein in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which, as Carr explains, "...erased the legal and ethical distinction between interpersonal communication and broadcast communications that had governed media in the twentieth century. When Google introduced its Gmail service in 2004, it announced, with an almost imperial air of entitlement, that it would scan the contents of all messages and use the resulting data for any purpose it wanted. Our new mailman would read all our mail." As for the social-media platforms, Section 230 of the Act shields them from liability for all but the most egregiously illegal content posted by users, while explicitly encouraging them to censor any user-generated content they deem offensive, "whether or not such material is constitutionally protected" (emphasis added). Needless to say, this bizarre abdication of responsibility has led to countless problems, including what one observer calls a "sociopathic rendition of human sociability." For Carr, this is old news, but he warns us once again that the compulsion "to inscribe ourselves moment by moment on the screen, to reimagine ourselves as streams of text and image...[fosters] a strange, needy sort of solipsism. We socialize more than ever, but we're also at a further remove from those we interact with." Carr's book suggests "frictional design" to slow posting (and reposting) on social media might "encourage civil behavior" — but then decides it's too little, too late, because our current frictionless efficiency "has burrowed its way too deeply into society and the social mind." Based on all of this, the article's author looks ahead to the next revolution — AI — and concludes "I do not think it wise to wait until these kindly bots are in place before deciding how effective they are. Better to roll them off the nearest cliff today..."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

"The third James Bond novel was published on this day in 1955," writes long-time Slashdot reader sandbagger. Film buff Christian Petrozza shares some history: In 1979, the market was hot amid the studios to make the next big space opera. Star Wars blew up the box office in 1977 with Alien soon following and while audiences eagerly awaited the next installment of George Lucas' The Empire Strikes Back, Hollywood was buzzing with spacesuits, lasers, and ships that cruised the stars. Politically, the Cold War between the United States and Russia was still a hot topic, with the James Bond franchise fanning the flames in the media entertainment sector. Moon missions had just finished their run in the early 70s and the space race was still generationally fresh. With all this in mind, as well as the successful run of Roger Moore's fun and campy Bond, the time seemed ripe to boldly take the globe-trotting Bond where no spy has gone before. Thus, 1979's Moonraker blasted off to theatres, full of chrome space-suits, laser guns, and jetpacks, the franchise went full-boar science fiction to keep up with the Joneses of current Hollywood's hottest genre. The film was a commercial smash hit, grossing 210 million worldwide. Despite some mixed reviews from critics, audiences seemed jazzed about seeing James Bond in space. When it comes to adaptations of the novella that Ian Flemming wrote of the same name, Moonraker couldn't be farther from its source material, and may as well be renamed completely to avoid any association... Ian Flemming's original Moonraker was more of a post-war commentary on the domestic fears of modern weapons being turned on Europe by enemies who were hired for science by newer foes. With Nazi scientists being hired by both the U.S. and Russia to build weapons of mass destruction after World War II, this was less of a Sci-Fi and much more of a cautionary tale. They argue that filming a new version of Moonraker "to find a happy medium between the glamor and the grit of the James Bond franchise..."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

The latest Facebook whistleblower, a former international lawyer, "cannot grant any of the nearly 100 interview requests she has received from journalists from print and broadcast news outlets in the United States and the United Kingdom," reports the Washington Post (citing "a person familiar with the matter"). That's because of an independent arbiter's ruling that "also bars her from talking with lawmakers in the U.S., London and the EU, according to a legal challenge she lodged against the ruling..." On March 12, an emergency arbiter — a dispute resolution option outside the court system — sided with Meta by ruling that the tech giant might reasonably convince a court that Wynn-Williams broke a non-disparagement agreement she entered as she was being fired by the company in 2017. The arbiter also said that while her publisher Macmillan appeared for the hearing on Meta's motion, Wynn-Williams did not despite having received due notice. The arbiter did not make any assessments about the book's veracity, but Meta spokespeople argued that the ruling meant that "Sarah Wynn Williams' false and defamatory book should never have been published." Wynn-Williams this week filed an emergency motion to overturn the ruling, arguing that she didn't receive proper notice of the arbitration proceedings to the email accounts Meta knows she uses, according to a copy of the motion seen by The Post. Wynn-Williams further alleged that her severance agreement including the non-disparagement provisions are unenforceable, arguing that it violates laws that protect whistleblowers from retaliation, among other points. In a statement, legal representatives for Wynn-Williams said they were "confident in the legal arguments and look forward to a swift restoration of Ms. Wynn-Williams' right to tell her story." That book — Careless People: A Cautionary Tale of Power, Greed, and Lost Idealism — is currently #1 on the New York Times best-seller list (and #3 on Amazon.com's best-selling books list). And the incident prompted an article by Wired editor at large Steven Levy titled "Meta Tries to Bury a Tell-All Book." ("Please pause for a moment to savor the irony," Levy writes. "Meta, the company that recently announced an end to fact-checking in posts seen by potentially millions of people, is griping that an author didn't fact-check with them?") And this led to a heated exchange on X.com between the Wired editor at large and Meta's Chief Technology Officer Andrew Bozworth: Steven Levy: Meta probably realizes that all-out war on this book will only help its sales. But they are furious that an insider--who signed an NDA!--is going White Lotus on them, showing what it's like on the inside. Meta CTO Bozworth: Except that it is full of lies, Steven. Shame on you. Steven Levy: Boz, it would be helpful if Meta called out what it believes are the factual inaccuracies, especially in cases where it calls the book "defamatory." Meta CTO Bozworth: Sorry you don't get to make up a bunch of stories and then put the burden on the person you lied about. Read the accounts from former employees who have gone through several of the anecdotes and said flatly they did not happen as written and then extrapolate. Steven Levy: I would love for Sheryl, Mark and Joel to speak out on those anecdotes and give their sides of the story. They are the key subjects of those stories and their direct denial of specific incidents would matter. Meta CTO Bozworth: Did you read what I wrote? I'm sure you would love to have more fuel for your "nobody wants you to read this" headline, but that's a total bullshit expectation. It isn't unreasonable to expect a journalist like you to do basic diligence. I'm sure you have our comms email! Steven Levy: Believe me I was in touch with your comms people...

Read more of this story at Slashdot.