jampekka

You seem to assume a case where academics write papers by single shotting from one prompt. Of course such papers are useless, but this is not how I at least use LLMs to write. I iterate the text in thousands of turns. I do tend to type all the final text in the manuscript too, sometimes editing it in the process. My current manuscript's session has about about 50k input tokens by me in about 1.6k individual messages. The manuscript currently is about 8k words (11k tokens). In total the session has about 50M tokens.

One frustrating, and very inefficient, part of the (lack of) division of labour in academia is that everyone has to write. And academic text has very particular format and demads, and writing it is a skill of its own. It's like asking that every software dev should be also be technical writers and write production level user manuals and ad copys on top.

And a lot more things than the writing goes into the paper. Designing, implementing and conducting the experiments. Studying, visualizing and analyzing the data. Interpreting the results in light of theory and previous literature. None of these require writing in the sense of writing a paper.

I would be ecstatic, and be a lot less wasteful in spending grant money, if I could stop wasting time writing the research in papers, and instead dump a git repo with some READMEs. But at least for now I have to also write the papers, but with LLMs maybe at 2x speed and with a lot less bad output.

When I write using LLMs, each paragraph may have dozens of iterations. The prompt is a lot longer than the resulting text and probably not really understandable. I'm sure nobody would want to read those prompts.

Building products is a different skill than writing about them. And if you write just "back of the napkin" people will complain about it even more than about an LLM version. Writing polished content is hard and takes a lot of time and skill.

AA-Omniscience is done with search off though which is not necessarily a very common scenario nowadays.

These are rather extreme cases. Very few of those who use benzos, tens of millions in US alone per TFA, will go on binges ever. Most problems are from the dependence caused by long-term prescription-level dosing.

What's wrong with it? Reads fine to me.

Lobbying others being banned from using AI for this kind of stuff due to bioterrorism etc is an excellent anticompetitive move.

I for sure don't love any of the oligarchs, but how is Zuck worse than e.g. Musk?

I think the point was that it was written by hand (in the pen and paper sense) as shown in the photo.

Could have used extra 1 centimeter to format the comment's list properly. :)

How do you know? Doesn't read particularly LLM written to me, and even if it is, it's quite well written.

The author has been blogging about this kind of stuff for over 20 years. I'd be surprised if they suddenly let bots autonomously spam their blog.

What is this spam of generic comments about how Opus 5.5 is so great, with perhaps some anecdote? How is that discussing the submission?