Iris van Rooij

This editor/author does the same “trick” as he writes: "Recently, the ability of large language models (LLMs) to predict protein structures and to accelerate the discovery of new materials has revolutionized both fields. New AI agents can now carry out many aspects of research…

science.org

What a surprise ….. “Is AI ruining our skills? Early results are in — and they’re not good Reliance on artificial-intelligence tools degrades the abilities of physicians and software engineers, studies show.” www.nature.com/articles/d41...

Is AI ruining our skills? Early results are in — and they’re not good nature.com

Conscientious objection should be absolutely normalised, independent of religion. www.businessinsider.com/worker-got-r...

She won an exemption from using AI at her tech job. The Pope's remarks could fuel similar appeals. businessinsider.com

🚨 Please boost, read, and sign if you want to support ✍️ OPEN LETTER: Pause the national rollout of AI-mediated tutoring in England's schools docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...

OPEN LETTER: PAUSE THE NATIONAL ROLLOUT OF AI-MEDIATED TUTORING IN ENGLAND'S SCHOOLS docs.google.com

"The class atmosphere became tense as more students pushed back against this required use of generative AI. They wanted to know what their classmates thought rather than what a large language model produced in response to prompting; they wanted to wrestle with difficult readin…

Students as Conscientious Objectors to Gen AI (opinion) insidehighered.com

Is this a good time to stop calling fascist technologies "tools" and to stop calling racism "bias"? hai.stanford.edu/news/ai-hiri...

AI Hiring Tools Can Yield Racial Bias and Systemic Rejection | Stanford HAI hai.stanford.edu

In case of use for others, sharing this slide in my intro class for a Bachelor course that I teach to AI students (and other interested students). More resources in thread 🧵

Can we start adding declarations of “no AI use” to published articles. I would want to know if what I am reading is slop, in part or in whole. Just saw a new paper cite me in odd ways that make no sense, unless some LLM use. But how can I distinguish sloppiness & misunderstanding from AI slop?

What, in your honest opinion, is a more *positive* outlook for an academic AI program: 1) Students are taught to enthusiastically use the latest AI technologies produced by industry. 2) Students learn critical thinking, politics of AI, and can do research in field of AI, broadly construed.

"Please Don't Use AI for Reviews" -- by @ffassnacht.bsky.social (repost from LinkedIN)

On LiNkEdIn 🤪🫠 Sir, I teach AI students and what you are saying is nonsense

They: You’re a creationist flat earther! Me: Excuse me, what?! They: You claim human cognition is impossible. Me: I do not claim human cognition is impossible. They: You claim AI systems cannot be useful. Me: I do not claim AI systems cannot be useful. They: Debate me! Me: No thank you.

Some AI researchers feel threatened by AI-critique without realizing that it is the AI-industry that is threatening

Some people think the problem is not that LLMs are extractivist and polluting plagiarism machines by design. No. The problem would only be that one could be *accused* of plagiarism when using an LLM.

Seeing scary entanglement between Dutch technofascist movements and EU level research into AI. Not that I could not guess, but seeing it black on white remains disconcerting ...

Using an AI-“tool” from [insert BigTech company name] for language editing of a paper about the remarkable capabilities of AI-“tools" is a COI in my honest opinion.