low_tech_love

6 ms·

1.
by low_tech_love 1mo ago
Here is my suggestion: scale the “difficulty” to the same rate as the submissions. Instruct the reviewers like this: “this year we had 10x the average submissions of the last 5 years, so be 10x stricter than you would normally.” Another ide
2.
by low_tech_love 1mo ago
Ok but what you described is very different than being forced to review if you submit. If anyone who submits a paper has to review that is just ridiculous. There is no requirement for submitting a paper.
3.
by low_tech_love 2mo ago
It’s important to notice that flagged papers were still accepted; anyone who spends any time around researchers knows the fact that most people are salivating over AI. That’s why they don’t want to punish it, they’re also using it. And they
4.
by low_tech_love 2mo ago
This is the truth. As a researcher, I say good riddance. It was always kinda stupid, AI is just accelerating the demise of something that hasn’t worked correctly for a few decades now. The time is way overdue for us to figure out some other
5.
by low_tech_love 2mo ago
“…because conferences have made it mandatory to review 4-5 papers if you submit to them.” Is that really a thing? So if I submit a legit paper it is being reviewed forcefully by a bunch of random people from god knows where?
6.
by low_tech_love 2mo ago
You are arguing that creativity is still alive by showing creative works from before AI? I think your argument is backwards.
7.
by low_tech_love 2mo ago
Hey, I gotta say that reading your actual original words feels much more interesting than whatever is that artificial slop on your website!
8.
by low_tech_love 2mo ago
The problem is that we want, at the same time, to allow everyone to do it (by not enforcing any rules against it) AND laugh at a satire like this as if it was ridiculous. Both things cannot happen at the same time. It’ll be some time before
9.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
It’s a joke and all but also not really? You might have to go do a chalk talk at some point, and that is basically the only part of this article that is actually not real. The rest (about how everyone in academia is prompting everything) is
10.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
Why would you bother telling them it’s satire?
11.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
To be honest, given the overwhelming (and unfair, and unreasonable) pressure against them from the Leviathan, which the other companies do not have to deal with, they’re doing pretty damn good. In my mind the trust has actually increased th
12.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
The FBI has started to test the idea in other countries: https://www.mixvale.com.br/2026/06/26/fbi-warns-brazilian-po...
13.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
Let me guess, somebody magically set some huge bets on poly and stock market 5 minutes before the announcement ?
14.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
Honest question: how do you think you contributed to the discussion by throwing some AI slop into an AI slop conversation?
15.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
That’s a great scene, with great writing, and a nice article written about it, but we’ve all been there. Anyone with a couple of synapses has thought “AI is not like humans”. To realize that is not the issue; the issue is: how do you deal w
16.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
Interesting when you mention Ship of Theseus, I never thought of that but I wonder if that is where the name “Ship of Harkinian” comes from?
17.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
It’s funny when people dismiss this as some kind of Luddite argument, when the reality is so simple: you have a producer-consumer system where the producer has been accelerated 1000x but the consumer remained the same. How can that work?
18.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
If the writer did not put effort to write, why would you put effort to read? Writing became 1000x faster but reading stayed the same speed.
19.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
” Perhaps we’ll get used to this new tool, and move on.” Perhaps we’ll be flooded with slop to the point where nobody can distinguish reality from fiction anymore, because it takes too long to check and reason about it with our outdated too
20.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
It does not matter, to be honest. Slowly people are realizing that nobody checks anything anymore, and when they check, nobody cares about positives or negatives, be them true or false. Actually, if you write something by hand today, all yo
21.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
Not only that but the vacation is real . If someone is off then you should not expect them to answer at all (because if you do you’ll get very disappointed).
22.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
I read one sentence into this and knew directly that the developer must’ve been Swedish!
23.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
They’re using public money to “train” this.
24.
by low_tech_love 3mo ago
Looks really cool, please release episode 1 as shareware! (Or a demo on Steam works too)
25.
by low_tech_love 4mo ago
I understand what you mean and it’s not wrong, but still there is a contract that is being fulfilled: human in both ends. Whether it’s rambling or not, someone wrote it, and it represents a person’s idea of whatever is being discussed. That
26.
by low_tech_love 4mo ago
And worse, you use it so much that when the question is actually great, you can’t convey that convincingly anymore.
27.
by low_tech_love 4mo ago
I’m still holding on to my hope that LLMs will destroy verbosity and usher in an era of concise and objective human-written works. Especially in academia. In my research area people write 10-page articles that could easily have been 2 or 3,
28.
by low_tech_love 4mo ago
Yeah, you’re spot on, and I hope people catch up on this soon (it’s already taking too long). I think one thing that most people haven’t realized yet is that reading AI slop bombs is really time consuming and stressful. We’re still operatin
29.
by low_tech_love 4mo ago
I think you’re wrong in one thing: Reading through meaningless walls of text takes time and effort that I’m not willing to waste. So it’s not just accepting a different culture; it’s not “free”. Reading AI grenades is really stressful (at l
30.
by low_tech_love 4mo ago
The sad thing is that the website itself is AI written, only made to be shorter and more concise. But still not human written.

More ›