ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.

[adriano@lile.cl]

@docpop @FediThing
To be clear, this is the same kind of argument as "What if I need to shout the N-word to save a baby from being crushed by a bus?", and the like.

[em_and_future_cats@mastodon.social]

@docpop I thought that’s why you cited them
Or have I read the memo wrong
(Completely sarcastic here )

[ftranschel@norden.social]

@heafnerj @docpop As in "only highschoolers can reasonably be expected to do this"?

(scnr)

[ftranschel@norden.social]

@csilverman @docpop It's almost like broken incentives lead to unintended consequences...

[ftranschel@norden.social]

@docpop I made the mistake of briefly looking at his X posts.

I'm... I'm just going to say I will not comment on it. My god, no.

[sassinake@mastodon.social]

@clew @FediThing @docpop

or analysis. Or reading. Or brains.

[mjc0961@mastodon.social]

@csilverman Incredibly rare Community Notes W

[happycrow13@mastodon.social]

@docpop Local idiot shocked to learn you should understand the subject you're telling other people about

[mrak@solarsystem.social]

@docpop You expect to get a reasonable response to post on X ???

[gustodon@mas.to]

@docpop James Miller took apart his Rubik's Cube to solve it.

[jackeric@beige.party]

@FediThing @docpop the chap's a PhD

[marta@corteximplant.com]

@docpop well physics papers can have like 50 authors, there is no expectation for all of them to read all of the sources, please

I don't always read sources added by my peers if I don't need to.

I'm in no way pro-"AI", however you're misrepresenting the point raised...

[a_cubed@mastodon.social]

@docpop @EthicalProfessor
They're not egen demanding thauch. Thye just require that authors check the citations are to actual papers, mot just imagined plausible-looking lists.

[jamesmarshall@sfba.social]

@docpop from his profile, Miller has a PhD from U. Chicago, a JD from Stanford, and is a professor at Smith College. I think this reflects badly on every one of those-- what is research from these places actually worth, if fake citations are common there?

He and his defenders are basically saying "everyone does it, and you're naive to complain." If it's true that everyone does it, that reflects badly on modern academia as a whole.

Any academic researchers want to chime in here?

[marta@corteximplant.com]

@docpop to add, broken trust from your colleagues has been a problem before AI too, here's a particularly popular story https://laskowskilab.faculty.ucdavis.edu/2020/01/29/retractions/

[rjblaskiewicz@mstdn.social]

@docpop Um....this raises so many questions. Like where did they buy their advanced degrees?

[tpfto@mathstodon.xyz]

@docpop good grief, these dudes are definitely telling on themselves. If they can't find the time or means to vet everything they've written, why should we spend the time or means reading their crap?

(See also: https://bsky.app/profile/manigarm.bsky.social/post/3mm2g7372yc2o )

[ggmcbg@mstdn.plus]

@docpop
"But I only had SuckJobAI create the fake citations to support what you and I both know is true anyway that I wrote about, if you'd just do your fuckin' reasear..."

[unchartedworlds@scicomm.xyz]

@FediThing @docpop

He said further down in the thread what he thinks citations are for:

"The citations are there to help readers who want to learn more about a sub topic, quickly locate new papers. They also function as a business suit, signaling that you're a serious person."

(yikes)

and various people have replied to that saying no that is not, in fact, what they are for!

[damonhd@mastodon.social]

@FediThing @unchartedworlds @docpop The bar to be one is maybe not as high as it should be? (That's how I hope to sneak in as one. maybe!)