I think this confuses the process of writing with the process of producing kno… · @noahatwhere · TwKit

@noahatwhere

I think this confuses the process of writing with the process of producing knowledge. A paper written entirely by a human can be scientifically worthless. A paper whose language was substantially improved by AI can contain genuinely groundbreaking research. Why should we care more about who wrote the sentences than whether the claims are actually true? Academic publishing already has serious problems with irreproducible results, weak peer review, publication bias, and incentive structures that reward quantity over substance. Banning AI-generated prose solves almost none of them. If anything, AI should push journals to become much more rigorous about verifying evidence, methodology, and reproducibility. I don't want journals that can guarantee every sentence was typed by a human. I want journals that can guarantee the research behind those sentences was actually done, and that its conclusions can withstand scrutiny. Scientific prestige should come from the quality of knowledge produced, not the tools used to communicate it.

曝光 132 · 评论 0 · 点赞 1 · 书签 0