Good thing we didn't. I'd say that was a win for "open science." The hypocrisy. Maybe don't use your power to order researchers to retract papers you don't find to be sufficiently full of hype if you claim to care about "open research"?
Discussion
Loading...
Discussion
(glumly) Donate enough to a nonprofit and you can tempt it to be so dependent on your money that it won’t ever contradict you again.
Worse than charity washing, active coöptation. Subornment.
some hashtags for spreading:
#openreview #openscience #openaccess
@timnitGebru
@timnitGebru Maybe, he needs those reviews, he wants us to write all reviews in the open, to train the next parrot?
@timnitGebru I'm sure you hear it all the time, but "stochastic parrots" is such a great turn of phrase.
Good thing we didn't. I'd say that was a win for "open science." The hypocrisy. Maybe don't use your power to order researchers to retract papers you don't find to be sufficiently full of hype if you claim to care about "open research"?
@timnitGebru you still make it sound better than it should. A slightly improved Eliza from the 60s is my preferred description. It does the same thing, but with vastly more data to fill the void of the conversation.
Bonfire community
This is a bonfire demo instance for testing purposes
Automatic federation enabled