51–60 of 300 posts
Maybe they should implement a graph based trust system: You need your favourite academic gatekeeper (= thesis advisor) to vouch for you in order to be allowed to upload. Then AI slop gets flagged and the shame spreads through the graph. And flaggings need to have evidence attached that can again be flagged.
Maybe they should implement a graph based trust system: You need your favourite academic gatekeeper (= thesis advisor) to vouch for you in order to be allowed to upload. Then AI slop gets flagged and the shame spreads through the graph. And flaggings need to have evidence attached that can again be flagged.
> arXiv requires that users be endorsed before submitting their first paper to arXiv or a new category.
Maybe they should implement a graph based trust system: You need your favourite academic gatekeeper (= thesis advisor) to vouch for you in order to be allowed to upload. Then AI slop gets flagged and the shame spreads through the graph. And flaggings need to have evidence attached that can again be flagged.
I am wary of that. IMO the business model is damaged therein. You can say in 2022 we had 27; bankrupt in 2030.
OpenAI shows exactly how well that works and what that kind of governance does to a company and to its support of science and the commons.
TL;DR, it's fucked.
Maybe they should implement a graph based trust system: You need your favourite academic gatekeeper (= thesis advisor) to vouch for you in order to be allowed to upload. Then AI slop gets flagged and the shame spreads through the graph. And flaggings need to have evidence attached that can again be flagged.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s so important, in fact, that there should be more than one such institution. People keep falling into the same trap. They love monopolies, then are shocked when those monopolies jerk them around.
I am using Zenodo for a while now instead. It is more user friendly, as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Of course there's a huge risk of it becoming made for-profit. The article says that "it will become an independent nonprofit corporation", and as OpenAI's failed attempt showed, converting a non-profit to a for-profit organization is either really hard or impossible. > Could they not have made it into some legal structure that puts universities at the top? As a corporation (even a non-profit one), it will have a bo…
OpenAI didn't get everything that they wanted, but I very much disagree with calling it a "failed attempt". The non-profit went from owning the entirety of OpenAI to having ~25% stake.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article lists the reasons quite clearly.
For everyone else, The reason is because arxiv is growing significantly leading to 297,000 deficit in operating costs for 2025 alone. Corenell has helped with donation a long with other organizations that pay membership fees. As a result, donors + leaders of arxiv think it's best to spin off to increase funding.