Don’t cite the Adversarial Poetry vs AI paper — it’s chatbot-made marketing ‘science’

https://pivot-to-ai.com/2025/11/24/dont-cite-the-adversarial-poetry-vs-ai-paper-its-chatbot-made-marketing-science/

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

51 points · 8 comments · view on lemmy.world

8 Comments

blakestacey@awful.systems · 9 pts · 303d (5 replies)

AI preprints : peer review :: Scott Aaronson : cops

dgerard@awful.systems · 7 pts · 303d (1 reply)

hey hey hey!! there's always making it a Conference Proceeding

lagrangeinterpolator@awful.systems · 6 pts · 302d (2 replies)

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 · 3 pts · 302d (1 reply)

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

blakestacey@awful.systems · 3 pts · 300d
zogwarg@awful.systems · 7 pts · 303d
The power, of words:
Is all but naught, if not heard.
And a bot, cannot.
bluetea@ioc.exchange · 4 pts · 303d
[ removed ]
boozook@mastodon.gamedev.place · 4 pts · 303d

@dgerard, oh nice quote-repost recursion. 👍🏻