And this doesn't even touch on the fact that a significant fraction of the published, peer-reviewed, authoritative sources ultimately turn out to be wrong[1]. Science is hard. Data collection and cleaning is hard. Mistakes are easy to make.

[1] https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/jo...

Ssssssh, we are not supposed to talk about the massive reproducibility crisis.

Oh. Sorry, my bad.

What about the fraud? Can we talk about that? Or the Sokal-oid "we'll publish nonsense" journals?

Seriously though, we should be talking about this. The greatest engine for progress humanity has ever built is rotting from within and its animated corpse is being used as a status-granting rubber stamp machine by the same old priesthood of "trust me, bro, God said I was right" but now in lab-coats instead of robes.

I absolutely loved the grievance study affair lol. It’s all too funny, but it’s actually a genuine problem that could lead to the eventual downfall of the whole enterprise, if it’s a massive towel of babel build upon rotten wood

This whole issue seems to hinge on a fundamental disagreement about what science (or mathematics) is. Papers aren't science, they're the receipts. But too many people apparently can't tell the difference, so we have the present blizzard of forged receipts (first from paper mills, now with new lemon scented AI++).

Mathematics and science represent two systems for sorting truth from BS. An exponentially increasing supply of BS makes that even more necessary.

As long as we're introspecting, and being on the watch for influence campaigns, it may be instructive to scan the article for the use of `/(center[ -])?(left|right)([ -](wing|leaning))?/` designations.

I think you just answered your own question.

What was the answer? That it's ricin because it'd never work?

I think that’s correct. This isn’t an actual weapon. It’s just talking like one to trick LLMs.

Nicely, it also filters out humans that lack a certain ability to reflect.

how so? the whole idea is that they don't even see/read the thing and so it sneaks by. and many even disclose ai use up front cause - gasp - they're not dickheads. pretty sure if github added a button to pre-flag one's own posts as ai, it'd be widely used. there's already a precedent for this on other platforms, like pixiv.

To read, yo mean.

Space. They are more resilient to radiation, faster, don't generate as much heat and are more tolerant of heat. That pretty much tells you where they're going to be used.

That was ten years ago. Today, lab grown diamonds are cheaper than natural at any size or quality, which is why the diamond cartels are sh*tting little bricks that are almost as hard.

Sure, but big ones still are expensive compared to say sand or other hard materials.

This is not my field, but I'm...socialy adjacent? and my understanding is that we grow big crystals of silicon because that's the mature technology, but then there are multiple cutting & polishing steps that add to the cost.

We want small pieces of thin wafers, but we grow huge crystals and then slice them into wafers that we then have to cut up. With vapor deposition diamond you can remove a lot of those steps by growing what you need, say a grid of chips of the desired dimensions directly on a carrier substrate.

As I understand it.

And the convert energy into fertilizer glitch.

Sure they were. They took copies back in a DeLorean.

Every humpback whale is related to every giant sequoia through a chain of intermediaries as similar as a mother and child (proof: go up via mothers to the first eukaryote, then back down).

That doesn't mean you can _incrementally_replace_parts_ of a whale until it's a tree, with every intermediate being viable.