I recently reviewed a paper, for a prestigious journal. Paper was clearly from the academic mill. It was horrible. They had a small experimental engine, and they wrote 10 papers about it. Results were all normalized and relative, key test conditions not even mentioned, all described in general terms.. and I couldn't even be sure if the authors were real (korean authors, names are all Park, Kim and Lee). I hate where we arrived in scientific publishing.
BattleGrown
joined 2 years ago
Deadnaming done right
It is one of the few useful usecases tho. It can summarize meetings if transcribe is on.
Late or not, we have to do all we can to stop runaway warming and ecological collapse. We know corporations and populations won't do anything voluntarily. That is why legislation is the only way. EU is taking the lead on this. I'm hoping world countries will follow.
Turkey has been doing it for more than a decade. It is very convenient, but now you can find tons of info about every citizen on the web because of leaks.
Makes sense to me. Sounds weird but some people don't have the ability to think in 3D. My wife is one such person. For example she can't combine in her head her actual spatial position and surroundings with Google Maps, so she can't use it. Same with those 3D rotation IQ test types of puzzles. I'm sure she wouldn't be able to use spatial computing.
Yeah, anyone who has written a thesis knows those tools are bullshit. My handwritten 140 page master's thesis had a similarity index of 11%.
There is custom gpts for that. ScholarAI and Consensus are OK.
They cant do it, it uses the original apk and add patches on top of it
Yes please! No more power to evil corporations. I don't want my server to add interaction to them and help drive their agenda.
I was there, 3000 years ago \o/
view more: next ›
I try to avoid reviews, but the editor is a close friend of mine and i'm an expert of the topic. The manuscript was only missing the date