this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2025
51 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2302 readers
58 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
dgerard@awful.systems
51
Don’t cite the Adversarial Poetry vs AI paper — it’s chatbot-made marketing ‘science’ (pivot-to-ai.com)
submitted 2 days ago by dgerard@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Not even poetically sound

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnIDt3xATVw&list=UU9rJrMVgcXTfa8xuMnbhAEA - video
https://pivottoai.libsyn.com/20251124-dont-cite-the-adversarial-poetry-vs-ai-paper-its-chatbot-made-science - podcast

time: 5 min 46 sec

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 9 points 2 days ago (4 children)

AI preprints : peer review :: Scott Aaronson : cops

[–] lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

You'd think peer review would make things better here, but big ML conferences have to deal with an absurd amount of submissions these days. NeurIPS this year got over 21000. The system they use for reviews is that anyone who submits a paper is required to review a certain number of other papers. So yeah, your ML paper is getting reviewed by other people who happen to submit their own papers. Who are competing with you to get their own papers accepted. Yeah, no problems there.

[–] dgerard@awful.systems 1 points 23 hours ago

and they're all using chatbots in their methodology and for the mandatory reviews

load more comments (2 replies)