Hey, it might work! By getting everyone to yell about the game instead.
So it’s a 100% hard no on any publisher being able to do this before the book is printed. It’s still a pretty hard no after - but it’s a 100% no for “in time to print the book”.
There are a lot of reasons, that basically boil down to two major policies: “notability” (ie, “should we have an article about this”) and “npov” (“neutral point of view”). The short version is “we don’t let someone with a financial stake write about a book that isn’t published yet.”
No, they certainly could not.
It’s a different kind of thing, for sure. But it does all eventually boil down to “there are and have always been more than two sex classes (and people often get real weird about denying it).”
The book I'm recommending to anyone who will listen is Kate Crawford's Atlas of AI, which is thorough and critical (and she used to work in AI). It was published pre-ChatGPT 3.0, so before the hype cycle exploded--which I think is a strength of the book, tbh. katecrawford.net/atlas
For putting AI-and-Education into the larger historical context, @audreywatters.bsky.socialmitpress.mit.edu/978026254606...
How ed tech was born: Twentieth-century teaching machines—from Sidney Pressey's mechanized test-giver to B. F. Skinner's behaviorist bell-ringing box.Contr...
Nothing. They’re already the people doing nothing and feeling miserable. It’s a symptom, not an ideology.
Wait, the same doesn’t hold for you in 2024? :P
Communal meals were also standard in a huge number of societies. You are not failing at a normal human task, you are being held to a frankly bizarre new standard.