This is the actress Zoe Saldana from Star Trek and Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy movies. She's hear because of the Renault Zoe. Yesterday, Pablo represented the Citroën. Just be glad I couldn't find any songs (or people) called Duster.
Whether you're an Old Guitarist or a Weeping Woman, there'll be something for you in this week's Snapshots. Hopefully you won't succumb to a Blue Period, and you'll be able to identify enough of the artists below to work out what links their songs...
15. Gender equality, favoured by Leatherface.
14. Police, NHS, schools... TV & radio.
13. Inside Jacob East, i.e. floating devices.
12. Are you ready? Are you ready?
11. Spanish footballer and Argentinian tennis player.
10. Innocenti transport.
9. Jesse, I could've told you, it's a day later in Scotland.
8. Arrives with the cheapo guests.
7. A pretender, but not so great.
6. Her mother takes her phone calls.
5. Sounds like Sinatra's Memory-maker.
4. Irving.
3. Grey-haired Welsh bloke makes a racket with compressed carbon.
Here's another Friday brainteaser / time-waster for you, based on a quiz I compiled at work. It's about words from other languages... words we don't have a direct translation for in English, but we really ought to get one. Because each of these is an excellent word, and would be very useful.
Ben sent me the above cartoon from The Grauniad shortly after last week's post about the AI Armageddon. It says a lot about the dangers of online rabbit holes and the propensity in human nature to allow ourselves to be willingly sucked down them.
I've been reading a lot more books lately. When Sam was younger and I was still working in The Bad Place, my reading-for-pleasure had significantly reduced, to the point where I was only managing a page or two a night (if that) and averaging under ten books completed in a year. I've got a much healthier reading regime going at the moment, at least two a month, more if they're shorter. I've taken to listing my latest reads on Goodreads... but then I find myself needing to add a review... and well, it's a slippery slope, isn't it?
You may recall that last week's anti-AI rant was spurred by a training session at work... one in which I felt rather like Chief Brody on the beach in Jaws, telling people to get out of the water on July 4th, while everyone told me it was fine and I should come in for a swim. Afterwards, we were given the task of going away and experimenting with AI to see how it could help us at work. That evening, I also received the traditional training feedback survey. So I asked AI to "write a response to this question: "What did you find most useful?" based on a presentation about the use of AI in education". As a result, I was able to submit the following reply...
What I found most useful was the clear explanation of how AI can genuinely enhance learning rather than replace it. The presentation highlighted practical examples—like personalised learning pathways, instant feedback tools, and automated administrative tasks—that showed how AI can save time for educators while giving students more tailored support.
I also found it especially valuable to see real classroom applications rather than just theoretical ideas. Understanding how AI can help differentiate instruction, identify learning gaps early, and support students with varying needs made the potential impact much more concrete.
Overall, the session made the benefits of AI in education feel both accessible and realistic, and it gave me a clearer picture of how these tools can be responsibly and effectively integrated into everyday teaching.
I admitted that the response was AI-generated, and hoped I'd made my point. There's a huge Great White Shark out there and I'd rather not be floating around on a lilo, thank you very much.
Khayem also replied to last week's post about the threat of Artificial Intelligence changing our lives forever.
...the rate that it’s sweeping through my workplace as a default tool is scary. I can see the attraction: regularly working overtime (unpaid) with an impossibly long to do list, AI prepping a document or report for you in seconds gives you back an hour or so to stress about the other stuff you haven’t done.
I’ve not gone done that route, but I also know that some tasks do take longer than they should because I’m tired/over loaded. However, I like my brain and I want to keep exercising it.
Having just done a round of recruitment for a fairly senior position, it was depressing at the shortlisting stage to see how many personal statements were clearly AI generated.
I admire your fortitude in standing up for the Resistance, K. The recruitment thing is telling though - I've also heard that AI is regularly being used to sift through and shortlist applications in many jobs, so even if you do go to the effort of sculpting your own CV, chances are it might be rejected by the machine for not sounding enough like a machine. According to a recent feature on BBC News...
...AI screening looks for certain keywords in an applicant's CV. As a result, the bigger picture, which might reveal whether the applicant is actually a good fit is lost.
Surely if you want to give somebody a job, you want to meet them and talk to them first? In my current role, I know for a fact that when I reached the interview stage, I was up against people with far better qualifications on paper... but in the interview itself, I was able to come out on top. Now though (according to that same article on the Beeb), some companies are even using AI for telephone and online interviews... with only a select few making it through to sitting in front of an actual human being.
We might not be able to blame employers for this though, since a tough job market and artificial assistance have increased the number of applications many jobs receive, tenfold.
There are bots that can apply to 1,000 jobs on your behalf while you sleep, tailoring your CV for each of them. This means that the fewer jobs that are on the market are getting more applicants than ever, not just because there are more candidates, but because these candidates are applying to more roles than ever.
This just creates a really dire state where the only way that recruiters and companies can possibly sift through these is by using AI to filter them, so a lot of people are just getting automatically rejected or ghosted from roles. That is less to do with their actual skills, because no human has seen their CV.
Where does this all end? I figured I might ask our AI Overlords...
It can feel like you’re shouting into a void when an algorithm is the one "reading" your life’s work. In 2026, AI screening has moved beyond simple word matching; it now looks for context, depth, and human authenticity. If you feel like you're being "rejected by the bot," it's likely due to one of three things: formatting that confuses the scanner, a lack of specific "signal" words, or—ironically—sounding too much like an AI yourself.
So will AI start rejecting AI-written applications in favour of ones written by actual human beings? Maybe... if you use the correct "signal" words. Whatever they might be.
Ironically, this tallies with something another teacher told me last week about the latest bout of AI-written essays being handed in to schools across the country. After getting the AI to do their homework for them, the smarter students then add one further level of modification...
.jpg)
