ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
-
@ftranschel @docpop Had to look up scnr then it made sense.
-
@Darkphoenix @docpop There are sometimes physics errors in physics textbooks too.
-
ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
> You expect us to actually read the papers we cite?!
yes, lol!
ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
The change comes as arXiv and others struggle to manage an influx of AI-generated materials masquerading as rigorous science.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
@docpop I can't tell if AI made people stupid or if it just made pre-existing stupid people louder and more obnoxious.
-
ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
> You expect us to actually read the papers we cite?!
yes, lol!
ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
The change comes as arXiv and others struggle to manage an influx of AI-generated materials masquerading as rigorous science.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
-
@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?
@jamesmarshall @docpop no, we don't make up fake citations. But also sadly, not every co-author checks every citation. We rely on trusting our co-authors to not commit academic fraud.
I'm very in favor of verifiable academic fraud leading to (impermanent) bans from preprint servers. If your co-authors are committing fraud and you find out by getting banned from a preprint server, that sucks, but it's a great signal to stop trusting that co-author. Nature will heal.
-
ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
> You expect us to actually read the papers we cite?!
yes, lol!
ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
The change comes as arXiv and others struggle to manage an influx of AI-generated materials masquerading as rigorous science.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
@docpop In a civilised age James Miller would go down in history as the fool of the year. Now he’s just a another hustlebro competing other hustlebros trying to get rich off abuse.. Of systems that literally hold our civilisation together.
-
ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
> You expect us to actually read the papers we cite?!
yes, lol!
ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
The change comes as arXiv and others struggle to manage an influx of AI-generated materials masquerading as rigorous science.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
@docpop "So... We have to actually use our brains?
" -
@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!)
@DamonHD @FediThing @unchartedworlds @docpop There are universities and colleges and then there are "universities" and "colleges". Have you read about "Trump university"?
-
ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
> You expect us to actually read the papers we cite?!
yes, lol!
ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
The change comes as arXiv and others struggle to manage an influx of AI-generated materials masquerading as rigorous science.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
@docpop I think people tend to overestimate the percentage of scientists who actually read, in full, the papers they cite. This isn't about AI, it has always been like that!
Read before you cite!
Abstract page for arXiv paper cond-mat/0212043: Read before you cite!
arXiv.org (arxiv.org)
-
@jamesmarshall @docpop
The ACM, US-based but international, particularly in terms of authors, and events with refereed proceedings. -
@jamesmarshall @docpop
He's wrong. Not everyone does it. He's trying an argumentum ad populum. I'm on the publication ethics committee of a major Comp Sci academic society publisher and we would redact papers with multiple non-existent citations and ban the authors from submitting to our publications for at least a year.
You submit it as your work, you stand byit as valid. Jointly and severally, although we sometimes go easy on student joint authors with faculty (faculty should know better).@jamesmarshall @docpop @a_cubed
That should be retract, not redact. -
ArXiv announces a ban on AI content and the responses are hilarious.
> You expect us to actually read the papers we cite?!
yes, lol!
ArXiv to Ban Researchers for a Year if They Submit AI Slop
The change comes as arXiv and others struggle to manage an influx of AI-generated materials masquerading as rigorous science.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
@docpop That perfectly underlines one of my main concerns; well outside ecological, ethical, brain rot, unemployment .....okay - a single small concern of mine.
People get lazy and stop checking the product of auto-complete and just ship it thus slop feeds slop.
-
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
