What could possibly go wrong?
Reason- The Case of the AI-Generated Giant Rat Penis
An illustration featuring a rat with a cross section of a giant penis set off a firestorm of criticism about the use of generative artificial intelligence based on large language models (LLMs) in scientific publishing.
I thought everybody was hung like that…
Dirty Johnny said “Rats! big effin rats with dicks this long!”
Johnny was not AI or I at all.
Ahhhh dirty Johnny jokes. The good old days.
“Ahhhh dirty Johnny jokes. The good old days.”
I was in elementary school the first time I heard one. Suddenly I feel old…
the headline suffices to make the point
https://fortune.com/2024/04/08/japanese-companies-warning-ai-social-order-collapse-trust-lies/
l agree.
in light of the fact l predicted fudged digital court evidence 30 years ago
Artificial InseminationArtist ImaginationWhole lotta nothing. If the point of the diagram is to label the parts of a rat’s junk, why not blow it up so people can see? Perfectly reasonable for an anatomy book.
Ps. Poor rat is downright puny.
barnacles have the highest dick to body ratio shoulda used them for the diagram
https://www.ranker.com/list/largest-animal-junk-to-body-ratios/jacob-shelton
I don’t know where anyone got the idea that LLMs generate true statements.
…well, other than the dishonest marketing done by the people who made them.
Caveat Emptor.
LLMs can only generate semantically and grammatically well-formed statements. While their accuracy as far as being true statements can be heavily influenced by the training data, even with the best possible training data, there is no guarantee that any given generated statement will be true.
Kinda like humans in that respect, except many humans actually believe the BS they spew, and an LLM is not capable of believing anything.
Giant rat penis: could win any Toronto riding for Liberals.
What’s the big deal? We’ve got a penis-headed rat running the country.
Nice of y’all to catch up.
The point of the scandal is that if a paper so blatantly nonsensical can make it through peer review and get published, then it is impossible to argue that the peer review process has not completely broken down and is useless for ensuring quality research.
Which is the point I keep making to a certain homicidal ground squirrel.
+++D R.
“Which is the point I keep making to a certain homicidal ground squirrel.”
Who now seems to have moved on to rebuttals from YouTube ‘scientists’…
I think I saw Giant Rat Penis open for Nine Inch Nails.