Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Dr. Lucky Tran :verified: (luckytran@med-mastodon.com)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 02:44:01 JST Dr. Lucky Tran :verified:

   Including fake studies and using AI to generate a report should instantly disqualify anyone to lead a scientific agency.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 02:44:43 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     @luckytran And should subject the person to prosecution for fraud on the basis of whatever thing of value they were trying to obtain by doing so.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 02:45:30 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Rowan Brad Quni

     @QNFO @luckytran .. yay for telling on yourself, I guess? 🤷

   • Embed this notice
     Rowan Brad Quni (qnfo@mstdn.science)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 02:45:36 JST Rowan Brad Quni

     in reply to

     @luckytran Do you have anyone in mind? I use AI to generate reports often. I just did...

     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15555539

     The #fake studies thing is problematic but that's a #human #editor not #fact checking.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 02:47:02 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Rowan Brad Quni

     @QNFO @luckytran If someone submits a report citing fake studies, that's scholarly misconduct, and the primary party at fault is the one engaged in that misconduct, not the one who failed to sufficiently police them.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 07:07:23 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Rowan Brad Quni

     @QNFO @luckytran Using a slop generator and pretending you wrote the output without even being aware of the content is already scholarly misconduct.

   • Embed this notice
     Rowan Brad Quni (qnfo@mstdn.science)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 07:07:24 JST Rowan Brad Quni

     in reply to

     • Rich Felker

     @dalias @luckytran since I do not know what prompted the OP, I wish not to take sides in someone else's issue. Reckless or fraudulent behavior is clearly unacceptable. But what I suspect is the case is one of #AI #hallucination and #human carelessness: like the "AI lawyer" who didn't bother to check that the cases #ChatGPT spit out were real.

   • Embed this notice
     Rich Felker (dalias@hachyderm.io)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 07:08:49 JST Rich Felker

     in reply to

     • Rowan Brad Quni

     @QNFO @luckytran No they are not "indispensable". It's clear that you're here to be a dutiful cult member pushing that narrative, and the more you push it, the more slimy it all looks to the rest of us.

   • Embed this notice
     Rowan Brad Quni (qnfo@mstdn.science)'s status on Saturday, 31-May-2025 07:08:50 JST Rowan Brad Quni

     in reply to

     • Rich Felker

     @dalias @luckytran ...if so, then my soapbox is one of growing pains: #AI #language models are becoming indispensable, like it or not. If the report at issue endangered lives or was a deliberate lie, so be it. Otherwise, we would do well to better #understand how an #LLM works to avoid such mistakes as writers and judge those we find more as typos than #plagiarism.