←back to thread

504 points puttycat | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.328s | source
Show context
theoldgreybeard ◴[] No.46182214[source]
If a carpenter builds a crappy shelf “because” his power tools are not calibrated correctly - that’s a crappy carpenter, not a crappy tool.

If a scientist uses an LLM to write a paper with fabricated citations - that’s a crappy scientist.

AI is not the problem, laziness and negligence is. There needs to be serious social consequences to this kind of thing, otherwise we are tacitly endorsing it.

replies(37): >>46182289 #>>46182330 #>>46182334 #>>46182385 #>>46182388 #>>46182401 #>>46182463 #>>46182527 #>>46182613 #>>46182714 #>>46182766 #>>46182839 #>>46182944 #>>46183118 #>>46183119 #>>46183265 #>>46183341 #>>46183343 #>>46183387 #>>46183435 #>>46183436 #>>46183490 #>>46183571 #>>46183613 #>>46183846 #>>46183911 #>>46183917 #>>46183923 #>>46183940 #>>46184450 #>>46184551 #>>46184653 #>>46184796 #>>46185025 #>>46185817 #>>46185849 #>>46189343 #
thaumasiotes ◴[] No.46182401[source]
> If a scientist uses an LLM to write a paper with fabricated citations - that’s a crappy scientist.

Really? Regardless of whether it's a good paper?

replies(2): >>46182457 #>>46182500 #
zwnow ◴[] No.46182457[source]
How is it a good paper if the info in it cant be trusted lmao
replies(1): >>46182610 #
thaumasiotes ◴[] No.46182610[source]
Whether the information in the paper can be trusted is an entirely separate concern.

Old Chinese mathematics texts are difficult to date because they often purport to be older than they are. But the contents are unaffected by this. There is a history-of-math problem, but there's no math problem.

replies(3): >>46182787 #>>46183475 #>>46187709 #
zwnow ◴[] No.46182787[source]
Not really true nowadays. Stuff in whitepapers needs to be verifiable which is kinda difficult with hallucinations.

Whether the students directly used LLMs or just read content online that was produced with them and cited after just shows how difficult these things made gathering information that's verifiable.

replies(1): >>46183225 #
thaumasiotes ◴[] No.46183225[source]
> Stuff in whitepapers needs to be verifiable which is kinda difficult with hallucinations.

That's... gibberish.

Anything you can do to verify a paper, you can do to verify the same paper with all citations scrubbed.

Whether the citations support the paper, or whether they exist at all, just doesn't have anything to do with what the paper says.

replies(1): >>46183783 #
1. zwnow ◴[] No.46183783[source]
I dont think you know how whitepapers work then