Economist on journal AI-writing bans: human ghostwriting was never the issue
paulnovosad · x · 2026-09-24
On whether journals should have zero tolerance for AI writing: Franco Calabreses notes human ghostwriting for senior scientists has been common for 40 years — is the objection to writing help or volume? Paul Novosad replies his objection is to slop submissions that require large amounts of human referee time to identify as trash, something that never happened with human assistants; otherwise bad money drives out good and journals die.
Related event: Economist Calls for Zero Tolerance of AI Writing in Journals(8 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Philosopher Carissa Veliz: AI dominance is not inevitable — the future is produced, not predicted — CarissaVeliz · 2026-09-24
- Karpathy's 11-month tone shift: from coining vibe coding to feeling far behind — IgorCarron · 2026-09-24
- Taleb: AI Is Making High-IQ, Low-Imagination People Obsolete — intellectronica · 2026-09-24
- Gary Marcus amplifies critique: Dario's 'AI-driven biological discovery' wouldn't pass a PhD committee — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-24
- Why do people still trust AI lab CEOs at this stage? — gerardsans · 2026-09-24
- 'Models are just getting really smart': researcher pushes back on OpenAI theft claims — nabla_theta · 2026-09-24