Fuck AI

7558 readers

772 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

VerbFlow@lemmy.world

MrMcGasion@lemmy.world

TootSweet@lemmy.world

BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world

cynar@lemmy.world

drmeanfeel@lemmy.world

pavnilschanda@lemmy.world

CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world

WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world

Communist@lemmy.ml

eatCasserole@lemmy.world

SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world

NutWrench@lemmy.world

Soup@lemmy.cafe

iAvicenna@lemmy.world

Tinks@lemmy.world

wizblizz@lemmy.world

corus_kt@lemmy.world

Prandom_returns@lemm.ee

TrickDacy@lemmy.world

TheFriar@lemm.ee

HawlSera@lemm.ee

andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works

MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works

33550336@lemmy.world

Nougat@fedia.io

Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world

Quill7513@slrpnk.net

glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz

e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de

ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social

685

Wikipedia isn't a valid source (europe.pub)

submitted 2 days ago by thal3s@sh.itjust.works to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(TikTok screencap)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com 5 points 2 days ago

I don't think it requires being bought off to understand that a research paper should rely on primary sources and original thought where possible. Obviously incorporating analysis of those sources and potential biases is important, but you want to be able to form your own conclusions based on unfiltered information. Otherwise it's not really a research paper, more just a summary or review of other people's research.