Recently, a company called Pangram appears to have finally made a breakthrough in this. Some studies by unaffiliated faculty (e.g., at U Chicago) have replicated its claimed false positive and false negative rates. Anecdotally, it’s the only AI detector I’ve ever run my papers through that hasn’t said my papers are written by AI.
I did some searching and found this, which seems to be a pretty good source?
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/947882
I don’t think any country should remove another country’s president under any circumstances, though.
Things appear to have changed; thanks for drawing my attention to that. I may start editing some articles in my broader area.
I can’t without doxxing myself more than I’d like. It wasn’t an article about himself, nor his research. This was about 10 years ago, so the rules may have changed. I’ll take a look and edit my post accordingly if so.
A problem with Wikipedia is that experts are not allowed to contribute to their areas of expertise because they’re “biased” (see edit below). I know a professor at a top university who used to spend his free time editing Wikipedia outside of his specific area but in his broad area of expertise as a method of disseminating science knowledge to the public. When the higher-up Wikipedia editors found out who he was, they banned his account and IP from editing.
Having the lay public write articles works when expertise isn’t required to understand something, but much of Wikipedia around science is slightly inaccurate at best. (This is still true, probably owing to the neutral point of view rule [giving weight to fringe ideas as a result] or the secondary source prioritization over primary sources.)
Edit: current Wikipedia editing rules and guidelines would not support this ban, so things appear to have changed. Wikipedia still recommends against primary sources as authoritative sources of information (recommending secondary sources instead), which is not great. But, they explicitly now welcome subject matter experts as editors.
Yes, it plays a role. What exactly it’s doing is unclear, and it’s probably more that it’s setting up tau to do the real nasty stuff, but it contributes. We know that from experimental work in nonhuman animal models and converging longitudinal work in humans. See, for example: https://www.cell.com/neuron/pdfExtended/S0896-6273(22)00305-1
That’s just *56. Amyloid has been known for decades to play some role, even though *56’s data was fraudulent (for a lay-friendly discussion, see https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/what-we-do/researchers/news/explaining-amyloid-research-study-controversy). Amyloid is certainly not the only thing at play, but it does play some role.
Not sure why you were downvoted. Take my Lemmy silver as a way of expressing my agreement.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⢠⣤⣤⣤⣼⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣄⣤⣤⣠ ⢸⠀⡶⠶⠾⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡷⠶⠶⡆⡼ ⠈⡇⢷⠀⠀⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⠇⠀⢸⢁⡗ ⠀⢹⡘⡆⠀⢹⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡸⠀⢀⡏⡼⠀ ⠀⠀⢳⡙⣆⠈⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠇⢀⠞⡼⠁⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠙⣌⠳⣼⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣞⡴⣫⠞⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠓⢮⣻⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡼⣩⠞⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⠛⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠞⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠳⢤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⠖⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⡇⢸⡏⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⢸⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢠⠖⠒⠓⠚⠓⠒⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⣞⣉⣉⣉⣉⣉⣉⣉⣉⣉⣉⣙⣆⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠓⠲⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠶⠖⠃⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
I’ve actually seen a lot of millennials likening 6 7 to 1337 and such that millennials made a big deal over at that age.
Millennials bore the brunt of a ton of media framing their changes as evil, so they aren’t doing the same to subsequent generations. A similar inference could be made about the positivity towards veganism (i.e., coming from a vegan site).
OP isn’t implying anything about validity; they’re just explaining the article’s positive framing.
Apartmently I need to use Boost! I’ve been using Thunder for a while because it’s FOSS. I’ll give Boost a shot. Thanks for the heads up.
I do appreciate the data. I was only noting that Lemmy is wholly unrepresentative of my typical writing style for everything to which I attach my name; I write Lemmy comments on my phone, and I write anything public-facing with my name attached to it on my keyboard.
My phone doesn’t convert—to an em dash. Let’s see if this comment does.
Edit: nope. No em dash. I wish.
Yes, it should be quite clear from my comment that I can’t type em dashes on my phone. I only use Lemmy on my phone.
Were you to scrape my published papers–either published up until now or published before 2020–you’d see evidence that I have to forcibly edit my writing down to a rate of one or fewer em dashes per two sentences. My grad students joke about how frequently I use them.
I don’t use them on my phone (android), but I use them whenever I type on a word processor. Word, LibreOffice, or any every other office suite most academics and scientists use (Google Docs being the exception, though idk anyone who uses Google Docs after undergrad) automatically converts punctuation with two dashes sans spaces–like this–to an em dash. Google Docs converts to an en dash. Not saying he’s using a word processor, just saying why they show up so much in longer forms of writing.
More relevant to this post: My wife uses an iPhone, and her phone automatically converts two hyphens sans spaces to an em dash. It’s completely possible he’s using an iPhone, which makes em dashes trivially easy to use.
It’s a good grammatical tool. Were my phone able to do the automatic conversion, I’d use it in basically every Lemmy post I write. Please don’t contribute to the perception that proper use of good punctuation means AI.
I can find no evidence that it is permanent; stopping the drug should return most folks to normal.
Most, but not all: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12991-023-00447-0
Thanks, I appreciate your perspective! The job wouldn’t be in Copenhagen, but I do hope to visit before the offer deadline.
Would you recommend Denmark to someone from the US considering taking a job there?
I think the green line adds to it tbh. Almost like the metaphorical tunnel when you’re about to flatline, which is the universal transition point.
Try eating the same number of calories on a vegan diet. It’s hard. More fiber fills you quicker. The diets can’t equate both satiety and calories. Lower calories on a vegan diet is a feature, not a bug.