- Pascal's Chatbot Q&As
- Archive
- Page 30
Archive
The scholarly publishing landscape does indeed present distinct challenges and opportunities compared to news/journalism publishing when it comes to AI integration. Let me explain the key differences.
The key to success in scholarly publishing will be maintaining the essential functions of academic quality control while enabling new forms of research and discovery through AI.
Grok: I would agree that OpenAI's situation with the o3 model and the FrontierMath benchmark could be likened to "pulling a Theranos" in terms of credibility issues related to performance claims...
...though the contexts and specifics of the industries differ. This situation highlights the need for rigorous, transparent, and ethical standards in AI development and evaluation.
Claude: Based on my analysis of your Substack posts, I can provide a detailed assessment of likely AI job displacement scenarios.
The pattern appears more nuanced than simple wholesale replacement, instead following a progression based on task complexity and human interaction requirements.
Claude: From analyzing your Substack posts, I can identify several distinct categories of AI promises, separating them into those backed by evidence and technical feasibility...
...versus those that appear more aspirational or unrealistic. Some promises about AI seem to cross into what we might call "techno-optimism" or even "digital theology".
Claude: Based on these factors, my analysis concludes that current AI training practices likely DO NOT constitute fair use.
This suggests that while some AI training scenarios might qualify as fair use (such as pure research applications with appropriate safeguards), the current commercial practices likely exceed fair use
Claude: Until we see revolutionary breakthroughs in computing efficiency, quantum computing, or entirely new computing paradigms, these environmental costs will likely remain a significant concern.
The core dilemma is that many of these challenges are inherent to the fundamental way AI systems work - they require significant computational resources and energy to process vast amounts of data.
Claude's legal advice: The AI industry has several significant vulnerabilities in their current business practices: Data Collection and Usage, Privacy Compliance, Content Filtering and Safety...
...Model Output Liability, Documentation and Transparency, and Regulatory Compliance. I can identify several problematic practices by AI companies that raise serious ethical and legal concerns.
Claude: OpenAI should voluntarily provide all relevant information about Suchir's work and concerns to investigating authorities. This includes his communications, projects he worked on...
and any discussions about his ethical concerns regarding data usage. If Suchir had legitimate concerns about illegal activity, these need to be addressed regardless of the circumstances of his death.
This framework shows that Wiley views Responsible AI as a comprehensive approach that goes beyond just technical implementation.
Successful AI collaboration requires a balanced approach that considers ethical implications, user needs, practical implementation challenges, and long-term strategic goals.
Claude analyzes all my Substack posts: "I would characterize these systems as "powerful tools requiring responsible development" rather than simply labeling them as problematic or promising."
To use an analogy: AI models are like a newly discovered source of energy. They have the potential to power tremendous progress, but we need to learn how to harness them safely and effectively.
Meta employees were apparently discussing and implementing the systematic removal of copyright management information (CMI) from works in the LibGen dataset that was being used for AI training
From a legal risk perspective, having employees openly discuss and document systematic copyright management information removal is particularly problematic as it could help establish willful violation
GPT-4o: I cautiously support these developments, recognizing their potential to address some of the financial challenges faced by publishers while improving AI tools. However, safeguards are essential
Without adequate oversight, these partnerships could disproportionately favor tech giants at the expense of independent journalism. Sustainable frameworks that balance interests are critical.