AI Circle Debates Peer Review: Is Breaking Academic 'Norms' Good for Science?
basedjensen · x · 2026-10-11
- Mathematician David Bessis pushed back on the idea that "trampling norms" could be the best thing for science in a century, arguing the disruptive force is AI itself, not norm-breaking.
- @basedjensen countered: researchers have long complained about publish-or-perish and a broken referee system — they don't get to complain when someone actually does something about it. The exchange captures the ongoing AI-community debate over traditional academic publishing.
More from AGI Musings
- Commenter warns giving unconscious AI moral authority is a structural danger — AlexTensor · 2026-10-11
- 2026 is everyone trying to make themselves illegible to AI and legible to capital — kevinakwok · 2026-10-11
- X's Nikita Bier: Welfare Applicants Should Lose Benefits for Not Using AI to Make Money — nikitabier · 2026-10-11
- Diamandis: Musk believes in universal high income, with healthcare better than today's billionaires' — PeterDiamandis · 2026-10-11
- AI's underappreciated virtue: filling knowledge gaps without judgment — arjunrajlab · 2026-10-11
- Musk says humanity is a bootloader for AI; critics argue Altman's merge thesis is equally 'extinctionist' — PolarBearby · 2026-10-11