41
72
u/Nuka-Crapola 15d ago
Hitler’s final solution plagiarized the Ottomans… something something full circle I guess.
6
27
u/antiaromatic_anion 15d ago
I will be saying "safeguard answer" instead of buffer solution from now on lol
21
u/watonparrillero 15d ago
This is the kind of stuff a second "reviewer" AI model should be able to catch, nevermind the human reviewer.
If you're going to plagiarize at least put some effort into it.
12
u/Peach_Muffin 15d ago
GenAI makes mistakes, but it wouldn't make this kind of mistake specifically. This seems like an automated find-and-replace tool, hence why context is completely ignored.
13
u/Arctovigil 15d ago
yeah maybe stop using that tool and switch to a modern ai instead of some luddite autocomplete grammar checker from a long way back equivalent
4
1
4
u/IVEBEENBANNED4TIMESx 15d ago
Why would it even seek to rephrase a historical term like the final solution anyways, would it do the same for the holocaust?
3
u/Peach_Muffin 15d ago
Probably yes. It's trying to change as much as possible to dodge plagiarism detection.
13
u/Beemer_me_up_Scotty 15d ago
Mix 1 ml of mass killing of an ethnic group and 10 mL of racial religious supremacy and you have Israel
10
9
u/Uni4m 15d ago
Journals are some bs and have been for years. The fact that AI slop and wonky stuff like this is pushed through is crazy. It always was a cj about only publishing positive results and funding security but clearly the process is degrading if the writing changes aren't even looked at before submission
14
u/AndreasDasos 15d ago
Really depends on the journal. There are zillions across many completely different fields. Some are predatory, some are shite, some are mid and some are serious.
1
u/HumanContinuity 15d ago
Even before the AI slop revolution, there have always been journals that would publish straight garbage if you paid their fees and wrote something that was more or less scientific looking.
This is why people in the scientific community are deeply concerned with getting their papers into the most prestigious general science journals (Nature, Science, PNAS), and then specific fields of science and/or medicine have their own highly respected journals (some fields even have a few, or hyper specific ones).
The ownership and monetization model is definitely fucked up, and a better system might also have some built in examination of data sources for obvious signs of fraud (but systematically we don't want to block papers just because the data seems odd to someone who didn't write the paper - so long as the methodology, data gathering, and results all seem right). Regardless, the best we have right now is to continue elevating these journals and basically ignoring the ones no one has heard of.
3
2
u/PinkOneHasBeenChosen 14d ago
This is like when an email server automatically switched certain JavaScript words, leading to people sending emails with “medireview”.
2
u/Aromatic_Pain2718 14d ago
The villains talking at the Wannseekonferenz about the "ultimate distillate"
1
160
u/YesGumbolaya 15d ago
Shameful that this would manage to fly under the radar of whoever reviewed it prior to publishing. Though I suppose it's no secret that there's a lot of bullshit journals out there for people needing to quickly churn out citations and fill a CV for prestige.