3 ms·
There's a long, detailed, often repeated answer to your open question in the article. Namely, if you can't do it without the AI, you can't tell when it's given
by mattmanser 6mo ago
There's a long, detailed, often repeated answer to your open question in the article.
Namely, if you can't do it without the AI, you can't tell when it's given you plausible sounding bullshit.
So Bob just wasted everyone's time and money.
- carlosjobim 6mo agoYou can verify by running the code and see if it works.
- mattmanser 6mo agoSeriously? The article is about scientists learning to do science, not programming. I know we're not supposed to say RTFA, but your comment really takes the cake.
- carlosjobim 6mo agoMy mistake then. There's so much AI discussion here on HN from the developer perspective, that it's easy to get lost. But why wouldn't my comment apply to all science? You have to make experiments and gather evidence, otherwise it's not science, it's just academia.
- greedo 6mo agoIf you read the article, it covers much of this. It's not just gathering evidence, but evaluating the data you've collected.