What the actual fuck is this email?!??!!!

[debcha@saturation.social]

@rednikki @sundogplanets The worst thing about this is that citations are boring and finicky and you sometimes have to look in a lot of different places for them and they have to be formatted to spec so it absolutely *should* be the thing that computers do better than humans.

And fucking YET.

[lachlan@mastodon.social]

@rednikki @sundogplanets Feels like it goes back to my rule of 'Never entrust an AI* to something that a deterministic Macro or Tool can do'

*Yes, I know the snarky 'insert full stop here', but to some level, that may not always be an option, and it's not actually helpful in discourse.

[viss@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets

[tankgrrl@hachyderm.io]

@sundogplanets Botsplaining.

Unsolicited advice is the second worst thing right after unsolicited machine advice.

[decapitae@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets AI - should probably not be used for 'fact' checking, as its abilities are yet under -refined in these arenas Well meaning people, taken in by AI hype - have been mislead - as AI is yet not worthy of leasdership as we have understood it in the distant past (of course not recently as it has been absent from useful form and resonable public knowledge)

[petrapanda@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets
A fact checking AI bot is like the police investigating a copper who shot and killed an innocent person.
The outcome is certain and you can't do anything about it. If you try to, ICE will disappear you and your goats to the Central African Republic, where things are marginally better than in most parts of the fascists wet dream that is the USA.

[libroraptor@mastodon.nz]

@glitzersachen @rednikki @sundogplanets Is it possible for a scientist to misunderstand LLMs badly enough to think that they're a citation or knowledge management tool? Among the general public, that's reasonable ignorance – they're being actively duped by the AI companies. Among scientists, though, it's surely not ignorance but incompetence.

[floreana@poliversity.it]

@sundogplanets
I think it's trying to get a reply from you first and foremost to convince you it is a useful tool, a service you will want to subscribe to.
And to train on your reply, yes.

[rhube@wandering.shop]

@sundogplanets I was thinking, 'sounds like something an 'AI' would do, and then I got to the end of the email. Yeah, why are people destroying the environment for this garbage?

[anguadelphine@mk.absturztau.be]

@sundogplanets@mastodon.social

Finally got it: it's a Sign Of The Times.
The bloody things have been busy trying to get Fedi Accounts to harass people, probably where that originated.

We - the human race - are utterly f1cked.
Is there a single electronic source not slopped?
I doubt it.
Meanwhile the slaves to the things are destroying original literature to feed the things.

DNI unless you can be reasonably certain the other party is human and never take emails seriously; appalling the shit you get.
I almost miss the appallingly misspelt, grammatically bizarre Spams I used to get; now they're slop based crap..

*What Masto will read as a like is a reaction: ​​
That only because this instance doesn't have FFS one.

[shadsterling@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets I guess I read it as cherry-picked to say something that makes their plan sound less harmful than it is.

I guess that’d make it a bit like motivated reasoning as a “service”, but it’s the service of helping a motivated customer to influence other people’s reasoning

[littlebobbytables@mstdn.social]

@sundogplanets

It's mansplaining because it was trained on mansplaination.

[jigmedatse@social.openpsychology.net]

@sundogplanets@mastodon.social That's bonkers... Yeah Fuck AI... And love the goats...

[axomamma@mastodon.online]

@sundogplanets I don't remember who but someone was posting here about iLands making bot accounts on their server.

[derickr@phpc.social]

@sundogplanets iLands has tried (and failed) to get one of these things an account on our Mastodon instance. I have a feeling this is only getting worse, as although we require approval of accounts, many other instances do not.

[ox1de@cyberplace.social]

@sundogplanets it’s our slop future

[skaphle@social.tchncs.de]

@debcha @rednikki @sundogplanets There are solutions that involve computers and they were introduced like 40 years ago. Export citation as a BibTex item, use LaTeX to format paper, for example. Want a different citation style? Just change one option.

Maybe someone made a different program that is more accessible to laypeople than LaTeX. But manually doing boring citation spec stuff has long since been "solved" in computer science. People don't need to use MS word.

And most importantly, it works with deterministic precision and not with stochastic randomness.

[adamantichrist@mastodon.social]

@sundogplanets AI-splaining

[kathol@machteburch.social]

@skaphle @debcha @rednikki @sundogplanets and even then, you could use any Citation Software like Citavi, have a browser plugin, just import your source, check it, have the word plugin...

But well, people would still need to check...

[hydreprever@mathstodon.xyz]

@skaphle @debcha @rednikki @sundogplanets the boring part is getting your bibtex entry right...