The issue is that Big Tech commercial incentives around AI have polluted the “boring academic” waters with dishonest infomercials masquerading as journal articl

The issue is that Big Tech commercial incentives around AI have polluted the “boring academic” waters with dishonest infomercials masquerading as journal articles or arXiv preprints[1], and as a direct result contemporary AI research has a much worse “replication crisis” than the social sciences, yet with far fewer legitimate excuses. Assuming Google isn’t lying, a lot of controversy would go away if they actually released their benchmark data for independent people to look at. They are still refusing to do so: https://cacm.acm.org/news/updates-spark-uproar/ https://cacm.acm.org/news/updates-spark-uproar/ Google thinks we should simply accept their conclusions by fiat. And don’t forget about this: Madden further pointed out that the “30 to 35%” advantage of RePlAce was consistent with findings reported in a leaked paper by internal Google whistleblower Satrajit Chatterjee, an engineer who Google fired in 2022 when he first tried to publish the paper that discredited the “superhuman” claims Google was making at the time for its AI approach to chip design. It is entirely appropriate to make “personal attacks” against Jeff Dean, because the heart of the criticism is that his personality is dishonest and authoritarian: he publishes suspicious research and fires people who dissent. [1] Jeff Dean hypocritically sneering about the critique being a conference paper is especially galling. What an unbelievable asshole.