Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Questioned? (Score 1) 39

Ain't nobody questioning it. You don't explode the number of journals and fill them with comparable quality. By increasing the quantity of published material about 100-fold, you're increasing the quantity of quality by about 10%. And you're making that a lot harder to find. There aught to be a few journals of high quality stuff and some place just to get all that other stuff written down. Much of the blame lies with the publishing companies and a lot of the blame comes from "Publish or perish".

Comment Re:asking for screwups (Score 5, Interesting) 118

Chemists here. Outside of Alpha-fold, which is an astounding success based on a large but limited and curated data set, AI hasn't shown much use in replacing chemist. It's very difficult to capture the chemical literature in an accurate and meaningful way. And with the explosion in the volume of scientific publishing, you can bet a lot of the newer stuff isn't high quality. LLM's don't know how to capture structures. My forays into asking for structural information turn up nonsense. Unfortunately, if you're doing anything these days, you're gonna have to say you're using AI to be considered serious, regardless of whether it works or not.

Comment Re:The jokes should write themselves on this one (Score 1) 52

Be careful there. I started talking like this on Reddit one time and I was subjected to a sustained and blistering attack. It was down voted so far that you could probably never find it again. Then someone copied my comment from an economics subreddit and reposted it on the cryptocurrency subreddit and they were even more viscous.

Slashdot Top Deals

People will buy anything that's one to a customer.

Working...