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.
More from AGI Musings
- Gary Marcus doubles down: LLMs still lack proper world models and common sense — GaryMarcus · 2026-11-12
- Toby Ord flags major wording error in AI forecast: pacing assumptions wrongly omitted — tobyordoxford · 2026-11-12
- Investor: AI diffusion will be slowest in consumer software — Oura, Strava, Labcorp still have no real AI strategy — MartinGTobias · 2026-11-12
- On AI Progress: When Models Lag on Your Load-Bearing Skill, You Can't See Them Improving — dfrsrchtwts · 2026-11-12
- Slack's David Hoang: agents beat people on coordination, proposes 'boundary agents' — davidhoang · 2026-11-12
- CS student mourns coding flow states he'll never experience in the AI era — chrissyykat · 2026-11-12