Economists call for zero tolerance on AI-written papers: reject, retract, and ban authors
paulnovosad · x · 2026-09-25
Paul Novosad argues journals should adopt a zero-tolerance policy on AI writing. Seth Lazar's concrete proposal: any paper found substantially AI-written gets rejected or retracted, with the author permanently banned from the venue. "You might have beaten Pangram v4, but can you be sure you'll beat v5? Would you stake your reputation on it?" Novosad warns that justified exceptions would be swamped by an avalanche of slop that demoralizes referees and kills journals—the bad money drives out the good.
More from Safety
- AI firms' fair-use defense shaky as their own people call training 'astonishing theft' — rvp · 2026-09-25
- The 'No Magic OOD' Principle: Flagging a Common Flaw in Alignment Plans — nabla_theta · 2026-09-25
- Peter Thiel: if the US slows AI development, China wins — beffjezos · 2026-09-25
- Before Anthropic's Mythos there was SATAN: what the 1995 scanner panic does and doesn't teach — maier_ak · 2026-09-25
- The real test of AI governance: zero egress and independent audit trails on hardware you control — Ghost_Pilot_MD · 2026-09-25
- Content governance is a control problem: without an offline tamper-evident audit ledger, promises stay unverified — Ghost_Pilot_MD · 2026-09-25