Usually I’d also feel bad dunking on a random. However, when that random does a disservice to the scientific community, I think it becomes fair game.
Specially in the light of the ongoing replication crisis. There are multiple reasons scientists are having a hard time reproducing published results, but a lot of them boils down to “someone skipped proper procedures” (like he encourages people to). Peer review is supposed to catch this, but when a person who can enforce those proper procedures says “we’ll enforce them”, suddenly the same random makes up reasons against the policy.
whats_a_lemmy@midwest.social 1 week ago
It is always morally correct to dunk on AI boosters