The article is AI written, but does make some useful points. However, editors need to be up-to-date enough on AI research to ban references to deeply methodologically suspect NANDA paper, especially a year later when we much better information about what is happening in companies
AI 摘要
Ethan Mollick 指出,AI 撰写的文章虽有一定价值,但编辑需紧跟 AI 研究,以拒绝引用方法存疑的 NANDA 论文,尤其是一年后已有更可靠企业数据时。引用推文建议新闻机构使用 AI 检测器或让熟悉 AI 的人预审稿件,并认可 Tyler Cowen 直接附上原始 AI 输出的做法。
The article is AI written, but does make some useful points. However, editors need to be up-to-date enough on AI research to ban references to deeply methodologically suspect NANDA paper, especially a year later when we much better information about what is happening in companies
News orgs need to use AI detectors, or at least have someone who uses AI preread their articles. Not a bad article! But some sections are obviously AI-written (...