[flagged]
Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
41–50 of 68 posts
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#42Perhaps the author(s) were reprising Alan Sokal's seminal work?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair
If so, I salute them. Exposing sloppiness and malpractise is a noble pursuit. I had my own bit of fun and 15 minutes of fame with software 'awards':
https://successfulsoftware.net/2007/08/16/the-software-award...
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#43Not only that. The JAK "pathway" is complete gibberish. The third figure is a pool of random spheres in "differentiation" steps. The whole Frontiers publishing group is widely seen in academia as worthless, however, since most promotion committees just count the number of publications no matter where they may be, they continue to publish anything and make bank.
This has not been my experience with any of the promotion committees I've been on. But Frontiers has been off my list since Frontiers in Public Health published a number of AIDS denialism papers. And yeah, every figure in this paper is nonsensical garbage.
Is the text garbage as well? I don't have any knowledge of the subject area.
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suppose manufacturing washing machines that reliably give up the ghost months within warranty expiry is its own kind of impressive.
Not that hard when they have a processor in that knows the date or an Internet connection. I'm not suggesting anyone has done that yet. But only a matter of time, surely?
Great, I can't wait for appliances that stuxnet themselves shortly after their warranty period.
New home automation hack: have your pi-hole pull double duty by running a local, pirate NTP server that forever makes the appliances think they're only a year old.
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me, this is the real question. One of the purposes of the peer-review is to validate and verify results, which was clearly not done to a great extent here. Perhaps the reviewers were also using some type of AI?
The reviewers are cited as part of the publication: Binsila B. Krishnan, National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology (ICAR), India Jingbo Dai, Northwestern Medicine, United States
From a quick Google, they appear to be real people.
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#46Simple solution: fire the editor.
Bit harder: into the sun.
Seriously, did anyone even look at it before it was added?
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#47It is actually Ars Technica that should be ashamed of this article. There is nothing at all newsworthy about a predatory journal publishing garbage, there are soooooo many of these. The fact that the journal says it's "peer-reviewed" is meaningless - they can say that and mean whatever they want it to mean. There are loads and loads of BS predatory journals that are "peer reviewed" but will print anything on their web journals. They charge authors page charges and make money off scammy folks who want to list "publications" on their own websites for credibility points.
There is no way real scientists are "aghast" - they are just rolling their eyes.
Source: my partner is a scientist and was the managing editor for a legit journal for seven years. She gets hilarious predatory journal spam ALL THE TIME.
Page charges are normal for academic journals, so unfortunately it's a scam that's not likely to go away any time soon.
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's not forget that OpenAI has probably scraped that POS paper and added it to ChatGPT. Someone should ask it what "iollotte sserotgomar" is. Also Note on the Mission Statement: "Frontiers follows the guidelines and best practice recommendations published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors should refer to the author guidelines for full details. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology is memb…
I wonder what happens when the majority of the Internet is bullshit generated by LLMs (which can't be long, surely), which is then used to train the latest LLMs. Will we pass an LLM bullshit horizon where the entire Internet becomes "iollotte sserotgomar" and it's brethren?
I guess we always feared ai would train on itself and become super smart, turns out the opposite happens
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
I imagine its quite difficult to get a washing machine to die as close as possible to the end of the warranty, but not before it. Just one week must take some real skill.
Precision enshittification. You'll soon be able to do a masters degree in it.
> "Precision enshittification. You'll soon be able to do a masters degree in it."
Only until someone trains an "AI" model to do it automatically... ;~)
Re: Scientists aghast at AI rat with genitals in peer-reviewed article
#50One of the things that worry me the most about AI is that it enables some of the most sloppiest and laziest operators to become even more sloppy and lazy.
This is deliberately adversarial, not sloppy