top | item 40496807

(no title)

bzalasky | 1 year ago

Had the exact same thought after reading the abstract… FWIW, delve only appears in the abstract. Having not read the rest of the paper yet, I might give the authors the benefit of the doubt that they used an LLM to summarize their findings for the abstract, but didn't abuse an LLM in writing the entire paper.

discuss

order

bee_rider|1 year ago

Putting aside the possibility that they just happened to use the word “delve,” IMO we still have to figure out the convention for this sort of thing. I don’t particularly value the time scientists spend writing the prose around their ideas, the ideas themselves are the valuable part.

One possibility, for example, could be journals allow AI written submissions but also require and distribute the prompts. Then we could just read the prompts and be spared stuff like the passive voice dance.

They probably abused a compiler to generate their program instead of writing it in assembly.

Sysreq2|1 year ago

Soon AI will turn a chickenscrath of notes into a wonderful email. And then turn it back automatically for the end reader.

We put to much emphasis on the look rather than the substance. People are afraid to send out an email with 2 words: Meeting Friday and instead pad it out with pleasantry and detail, context and importance, but none of that really matters.

manmal|1 year ago

A compiler yields deterministic results though.