Saturday, May 25, 2024

Trump ‘unified reich’ video reportedly

traced to Turkish designer’s template

Kari Paul

Fri, May 24, 2024

A video posted on social media by Donald Trump referencing a “unified reich” has been traced to a template made by a Turkish designer more than a year ago, according to a report from CNN.

Critics, including Joe Biden, condemned Trump over a video posted to his Truth Social account on Monday featuring a hypothetical headline from his second presidential term reading “industrial strength significantly increased … driven by the creation of a unified reich”.

The German word “reich” is heavily associated with Nazism, as Adolf Hitler referred to his regime as the “Third Reich”. The video raised alarm for Trump critics, who note the former president frequently echoes Nazi rhetoric – particularly in his language surrounding immigration.

According to a new report from CNN, the video was made using a template from graphic designer Enes Şimşek, who lives near Istanbul. The template was available on stock footage and video effects resource Video Hive and was created at least a year ago, the network reported, confirming that it was not created by the Trump campaign for this specific use.

The Trump campaign stated the post was not an official campaign video and was reposted by a staffer who had not noticed the word.

The campaign did not immediately respond to a request for additional comment.

The language in the video was reportedly copied verbatim from a Wikipedia article on the first world war, which read: “German industrial strength and production had significantly increased after 1871, driven by the creation of a unified reich”.

Şimşek confirmed to CNN he put in the Wikipedia information filler text for customers to replace with their own wording, which the video shared by Trump did not do. He said he had sold 16 copies of the template at a rate of $21 each.

“When I was doing this job, I never even thought that one day such an event would happen,” Şimşek said in a blogpost explaining the incident. “[Two] days ago this template was used as Trump’s campaign video. But I guess they forgot to change some of the text when they edited the project. And things grew very mad.”

Following Trump’s posting of the video, the Biden campaign cited other previous comments and actions from Trump sympathizing with Nazism, including his claims that Hitler “did some good things” and praising neo-Nazi marchers during the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville.

“Donald Trump is not playing games; he is telling America exactly what he intends to do if he regains power: rule as a dictator over a ‘unified reich’,” a Biden spokesperson, James Singer, said in a statement.

“Parroting Mein Kampf while you warn of a bloodbath if you lose is the type of unhinged behavior you get from a guy who knows that democracy continues to reject his extreme vision of chaos, division and violence.”

Şimşek was told by the video tool site to remove the language from his template, which he has now done. “By the way, thank you to Trump for choosing my template,” he said.

NEVER WERE PRO LIFE

Red states are using the Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade to expand the death penalty

Death penalty states want the Supreme Court to throw out its precedents and allow the execution of child rapists

By AUSTIN SARAT
SALON
PUBLISHED MAY 25, 2024

Ron DeSantis | Prison Cellhouse interior (Photo illustration by Salon/Getty Images)

Even as support for the death penalty wanes across the country, Republican governors, led by Florida’s Ron DeSantis, are signing into law legislation expanding the death penalty.

Earlier this month, Tennessee Governor Bill Lee signed a bill authorizing the death penalty for aggravated rape of a child. The law goes into effect on July 1. Lee’s decision makes Tennessee the second state, following Florida, to apply capital punishment to cases where no one is killed. A third red state, Idaho, is now considering similar legislation.

These laws, as the Death Penalty Information Center explains, “contradict longstanding Supreme Court precedent holding the death penalty unconstitutional for non-homicide crimes.” In fact, they are intended to tee up a case allowing the Supreme Court’s conservative, activist majority to overturn long-established precedent, just as it has done in other high-profile cases.

What the Supreme Court did in overturning its own precedents when it allowed states to prohibit abortion, has sent a clear message and prompted Tennessee, Florida (and maybe Idaho) to defy its long-established precedents in the area of capital punishment.

Proponents of the new laws hope that the court will extend the reach of capital punishment. They also hope to put death penalty opponents on the defensive by painting them as soft-on-crime defenders of child rapists.

Death penalty opponents must work hard to avoid falling into that trap. Their best political strategy, though it might not be a winning legal strategy, will be to say that the court should respect its own precedent rather than mounting a full-fledged campaign to explain why child rapists should not be put to death.

Before looking more closely at the Tennessee law and the political strategy behind it and the others, let’s recall what the Supreme Court has said about using the death penalty for non-homicide cases like rape.In a 7-2 decision handed down in 1977, the court found that capital punishment was “grossly disproportionate” to the crime of rape. Justice Bryon White, who wrote the majority opinion in Coker v. Georgia, turned to history to help explain that judgment.

“At no time in the last 50 years,” White said, “have a majority of the States authorized death as a punishment for rape. In 1925, 18 States, the District of Columbia, and the Federal Government authorized capital punishment for the rape of an adult female. By 1971, … that number had declined, but not substantially, to 16 States plus the Federal Government.”

That situation changed dramatically in the aftermath of the Supreme Court’s 1972 decision in Furman v. Georgia striking down the death penalty as then applied. Subsequently, more than 30 states reenacted their death penalty statutes, but few reauthorized it as a punishment for rape.

As White explained, it “should also be a telling datum that the public judgment with respect to rape, as reflected in the statutes providing the punishment for that crime, has been dramatically different. In reviving death penalty laws to satisfy Furman's mandate, none of the States that had not previously authorized death for rape chose to include rape among capital felonies.”

White recognized “the seriousness of rape as a crime.” As he put it, “It is highly reprehensible, both in a moral sense and in its almost total contempt for the personal integrity and autonomy of the female victim and for the latter's privilege of choosing those with whom intimate relationships are to be established. Short of homicide, it is the ‘ultimate violation of self.’”

Still, White insisted that “in terms of moral depravity and of the injury to the person and to the public,…(rape) does not compare with murder, which does involve the unjustified taking of human life…. The murderer kills; the rapist, if no more than that, does not…. We have the abiding conviction that the death penalty, which ‘is unique in its severity and irrevocability,’ is an excessive penalty for the rapist who, as such, does not take human life.”

Chief Justice Warren Burger and Justice William Rehnquist, who dissented in Coker, accused the majority of “engraft(ing) their conceptions of proper public policy onto the considered legislative judgments of the States.” They branded the decision to bar the death penalty in rape cases “very disturbing.”

Three decades after Coker, in a case called Kennedy v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that ruling and extended it to cover the rape of a child. Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for a five-justice majority, conceded that “Petitioner’s crime was one that cannot be recounted in these pages in a way sufficient to capture in full the hurt and horror inflicted on his victim or to convey the revulsion society….”

But he argued that “in determining whether the death penalty is excessive, there is a distinction between intentional first-degree murder on the one hand and nonhomicide crimes against individual persons, even including child rape, on the other. The latter crimes may be devastating in their harm, as here, but ‘in terms of moral depravity and of the injury to the person and to the public,’… they cannot be compared to murder in their ‘severity and irrevocability.’”

Justice Samuel Alito, in a blistering dissent, said that he found it incredible that that death could never be an appropriate punishment “no matter how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted, and no matter how heinous the perpetrator’s prior criminal record may be.”

Understanding the political danger of supporting the court’s decision, in 2008 both of the major party presidential candidates, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, condemned it. “I think,” Obama observed, “that the rape of a small child, 6 or 8 years old, is a heinous crime, and if a state makes a decision that… the death penalty is at least potentially applicable, that that does not violate our Constitution."

This brings us back to the present.

Want a daily wrap-up of all the news and commentary Salon has to offer? Subscribe to our morning newsletter, Crash Course.

The fact that Kennedy and the other justices in the Kennedy v. Louisiana majority are no longer on the Supreme Court(Alito and two of the other dissenters remain) has not been lost on the people now openly defying the Coker and Kennedy decisions. They have also been spurred on by court’s increasingly cavalier attitude toward its own precedents. Nor has the political danger that Obama recognized for those who openly oppose the death penalty for child rapists escaped notice.

Tennessee State Sen. Jack Johnson, who sponsored the bill, highlighted that both when he wrote in an op-ed he wrote last month in The Tennessean. Setting the political trap, he asked “Was the life of a rapist more valuable than the life of an innocent child who will be permanently scarred forever? In Tennessee, the answer is no.”

“Child rape,” he continued escalating the rhetorical stakes, “is the most disgraceful, indefensible act one can commit, leaving lasting emotional and psychological wounds on its victims. As a legislator, and more importantly, as a human being, our responsibility to protect the most vulnerable comes first.”

Critics of this legislation, Johnson continued, “argue that the death penalty is an unjustifiable punishment and ineffective. However, in cases where a rapist is preying on the vulnerability of a child and inflicting permanent harm on them, a severe form of justice is the consequence they must face.”

Johnson was even more direct in talking about the difference the Supreme Court's composition might make when a challenge to the Tennessee law reaches the court.

“All five justices who supported the 2008 opinion are no longer members of the U.S. Supreme Court (Kennedy, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer). Three of the four justices who authored the dissenting opinion are still sitting justices (Roberts, Alito, and Thomas). Given the makeup of the current court, there is a strong possibility that Kennedy v. Louisiana could be overturned.”

As Johnson put it, “I feel very certain that the Supreme Court believes there is a strong, compelling state interest to protect children, and we believe this Court will support Tennessee's efforts."

He may be right.

What the Supreme Court did in overturning its own precedents when it allowed states to prohibit abortion, has sent a clear message and prompted Tennessee, Florida (and maybe Idaho) to defy its long-established precedents in the area of capital punishment. As Johnson made clear, they are banking that the court will now allow death penalty states to expand the reach of capital punishment.

Doing so would not only be a backward step in the ongoing effort to end the death penalty in this country, but it would also be another sign that, as former Justice Thurgood Marshall once noted, “Power, not reason, is the new currency of this Court's decision-making.”

By AUSTIN SARAT is William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Jurisprudence and Political Science at Amherst College. His most recent book is "Lethal Injection and the False Promise of Humane Execution." His opinion articles have appeared in USA Today, Slate, the Guardian, the Washington Post and elsewhere.

2,200 Ancient Artifacts, Including Compass and Roman Gold Ring, Unearthed in Arade River

Austin Jay May 24, 2024

(Photo : AI Generated / Austin Jay)

An extraordinary archaeological project in Portugal has discovered more than 2,200 artifacts from prehistoric to modern times.

The discovery of these remarkable artifacts occurred during a thorough survey of the excavated sediments of the Arade River and the Alvor estuary in the Algarve region.

The Role of the Arade River in Shaping Civilizations

These items were found using metal detectors in a project led by the Associação Projeto IPSIIS and overseen by archaeologist Vera Freitas. For Freitas, they are a "material reflection" of the different lives people have lived in this area over many centuries. They include everyday items, ritual objects, and professional tools.

Since the year 2000, the investigation has meticulously documented and conserved items that could have otherwise vanished over time. These artifacts have been relocated to the Portimão Museum and are currently displayed in the "Stories that the Sea Brings to Us."

This exhibition aims to highlight the Arade River's role as a cultural and commercial conduit and the historical significance of these discoveries.

The introductory words of the exhibition state, "For millennia, the Arade River has served as a vital route between the coast and the interior of the Algarve." River dredging, which is needed for transportation, found these hidden treasures. They show many things people have done from prehistoric times to today.

One of the most exciting finds is a compass from the 16th-17th century that shows how people navigated during that time. You can also learn how ships were built in the past by looking at nails, bolts, and adhesion leads. A Roman phalera, a carved disk that soldiers acquired, is also on display.

Freitas went into more detail about several items, such as a nautical probe and Roman amphora labels. In the past, the Arade River was a way for things, people, and ideas to get to other places. Many ancient civilizations used the mouth of the river as a port because it was naturally protected.

The items also show how people lived in the area around the river. Things like a Roman hairpin, a gold ring, a basin, and a mirror show how people lived and what they did in their daily lives. Older items, like a Bronze Age ax, help us learn about the long past of people living and working in the area.

A big part of the collection also consists of religious and ritual items. Some of these are a Roman chalice and an Iron Age artifact showing a bull meant to be a gift to the gods. These things signify how the people who lived along the river practiced and believed in spiritual things

The Aim to Educate and Encourage Action for Preservation

The exhibition at the Portimão Museum seeks to educate visitors about the value of protecting the history of the Arade River while also displaying these historical gems. IPSIIS persistently searches for and protects buried objects to ensure the permanent loss of these historical artifacts.

Freitas emphasized the unique nature of this initiative in Portugal and the controlled and legally permitted use of metal detectors. This cautious approach made the recovery and preservation of many artifacts possible, providing a thorough window into the area's rich past.

Until November, guests to the Portimão Museum may explore this fascinating collection and learn about the Arade River's historical importance and influence on the Algarve's cultural landscape.

Through the ongoing discovery and preservation of these historic items, the initiative emphasizes safeguarding our shared history for study and appreciation by future generations.

Coffee Consumption Linked to Lower Risk of Parkinson's Disease: Caffeine Metabolites May Play Key Role in Neuroprotection, Study Finds

YOU CAN'T DRINK COFFEE IF YOUR HANDS ARE SHAKING

Austin Jay May 24, 2024

Coffee Consumption Linked to Lower Risk of Parkinson's Disease

(Photo : Unsplash/Nathan Dumlao)

A groundbreaking study found a strong link between drinking coffee and a lower chance of getting Parkinson's disease.

This sheds light on the possible neuroprotective properties of caffeine metabolites.

The Protective Role of Coffee in Parkinson's Disease

Renowned researchers examined data collected by 184,024 people over an average of 13 years in their study. The results showed that people who drank coffee had a lower chance of getting Parkinson's than people who didn't.

The study also investigated the biological processes that make this connection possible, measuring the amount of caffeine metabolites in the blood of a large number of Parkinson's patients. Researchers found that people with higher levels of caffeine byproducts, especially paraxanthine and theophylline, had a lower chance of getting Parkinson's

"This study demonstrated an inverse association of caffeinated coffee consumption with the risk of Parkinson's disease in one of the largest longitudinal cohorts worldwide with more than 20 years of follow-up," the researchers wrote in their paper.

The result supports prior research relating coffee to Parkinson's disease prevention. This study focused on caffeine indicators years before Parkinson's symptoms, making it noteworthy.

The top 25% of coffee consumers were 40% less likely to acquire Parkinson's than non-coffee drinkers. Across nations, risk reductions ranged from 5 to 63%

Researchers believe caffeine's capacity to maintain brain dopamine may be critical to its protective effect. Parkinson's disease causes dopamine levels to drop due to substantia nigra nerve cell death.

The researchers explained that these neuroprotective effects align with their findings, which revealed an inverse association between caffeine, paraxanthine, and theophylline and the incidence of Parkinson's disease.

Another recent study supports the idea that caffeine consumption, particularly in tea and coffee, may reduce the risk of developing Parkinson's disease.

The study focused on people with East Asian roots who had mutations in the LRRK2 gene, which are linked to a higher chance of Parkinson's disease. The National Neuroscience Institute in Singapore conducted the study.

The results showed that people with these genetic differences had a much lower chance of getting Parkinson's disease if they drank coffee every day. This study shows that drinking caffeine, especially tea and coffee, might help avoid brain diseases.

Figuring Out How Caffeine Works in the Body

There is strong evidence that drinking coffee lowers your chance of getting Parkinson's, but the study doesn't show a direct link between the two. Still, the results suggest that coffee and coffee-based products may benefit brain health.

There are almost a million people in the US who have Parkinson's disease, so it is essential to know what makes people more likely to get it. The study shows that coffee is the most famous drink in the world for bringing people up, and we need to learn more about how caffeine protects neurons.

Researchers claim that understanding the biological connections between caffeine and Parkinson's disease is crucial for public health because it sheds light on the disease's causes and offers new strategies for prevention.

The Neurology study provides significant insights into the relationship between coffee, caffeine molecules, and the risk of Parkinson's disease. As research in this area grows, it sparks hope for discovering new ways to prevent and treat neurodegenerative diseases.

Piri Reis Map of 1513: Unveiling the Mysteries of Oldest Surviving Detailed Chart Showing American Continent

Conelisa N. Hubilla May 24, 2024

(Photo : Wikimedia Commons/ Yair Haklai)

An ancient chart, known as the Piri Reis map, not only challenges our understanding of historical cartography and navigation but also the chronology of global exploration.

What Is the Piri Reis Map?

In 1929, German theologian Gustav Deissman was cataloging maps belonging to Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II at the Topkapi Palace Museum in Turkey when he found something strange. He discovered a portion of an early 16th-century Turkish world map printed on gazelle skin parchment.

The map was dated 1513 and was compiled by Captain Piri ibn Hajji Mohammed Reis, a famous Ottoman cartographer and navigator. The Piri Reis map is a portolan chart that was used for navigation during the Middle Ages. Also called a compass chart, harbor-finding chart, or rhumb chart, the portolan map specifically lays the courses from one harbor to another with the help of radiating rhumb lines.

Born in 1465 in the Gallipoli peninsula in modern-day Turkey, Piri Reis began his maritime journey under the authority of his uncle Kemal Reis. He fought a lot of naval battles and later became a naval commander who led the Ottoman fleet in fighting the Portuguese in the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea. After the death of his uncle, Piri Reis focused on his passion for cartography, although he remained active in the Ottoman Navy.

According to a handwritten note found with the map, Piri Reis compiled it using several other maps and charts as major sources. These include Ptolemaic maps, Portuguese maps, an Arabic map, and a map drawn by Christopher Columbus.

Remarkable Features of the Piri Reis Map

For a long time, the map has been the focus of controversy since it portrays things no one should have known about at the time. The 34 inches by 25 inches (87 centimeters by 63 centimeters) map discovered in 1929 is not complete but only represents one-third of the original.

The complete map likely showed the entire world as known in the early 16th century. The remaining portions show Europe, Africa, the Atlantic, and the Americas. The large sections which were missing would likely have depicted Asia and more.

Much of the Atlantic coast of Africa and South America appears to be accurate, but other areas like the Caribbean and parts of North America were either distorted or inaccurately depicted. Meanwhile, several islands in the Caribbean region were deleted, and a mythical one called Antilia was included.

The most intriguing element of the Piri Reis map is the mysterious southern landmass, which has mystified geographers and cartographers for almost a century. Near the southern tip of South America, the continent bends towards the east and takes up the bottom half of the map.

This section of the map was seen as an error for many years, but others believe that this curious delineation is actually Antarctica. However, the "Antarctic" region is shown without its ice cover which has not been the case for over 34 million years.

Most likely, it is not actually Antarctica that is depicted on the Piri Reis map. It was assumed to be a huge land mass that existed on each of the four sections of the Earth to balance it out.

World's First Head Transplant Machine Unveiled: BrainBridge Start-Up Reveals Ambitious Robotic System in New Spooky Video

Kendra Stacy May 22, 2024

(Photo : Pixabay / Placidplace)

BrainBridge, a biomedical engineering and neuroscience startup, has revealed its pioneering plans to make the world's first head transplant system.

They have unveiled their ambitious robotic system in an eerie CGI video that features the head transplantation from one robot to another.

World's First Head Transplant Machine?

While the company had been operating stealthily, it revealed plans for the integration of artificial intelligence and advanced robotics for the execution of total head and face transplant surgery. Their technology aims to provide hope to patients who face medical conditions that cannot be treated, such as paralysis, cancer, and neurodegenerative conditions.

The ambitious procedure involves the transplantation of a patient's head to a brain-dead, healthy donor body. It aims to keep one's cognitive abilities, memories, and consciousness.

The firm plans to make use of high-speed systems for the prevention of brain cell degeneration and ascertain the compatibility between the donor body and head transplant. Advanced AI algorithms and molecular-level imaging will help with the exact reconnection of the nerves, spinal cords, and blood vessels.

The integrated robotics platform of the company covers two autonomous surgical robots meant for performing simultaneous surgeries on two bodies at once.

The process may also cover a comprehensive care plan after the operation to prevent rejection and encourage healing. This may be followed by four weeks of induced coma to enable the healing of the transplant sites

ALSO READ: Brain, Head Transplant Save Souls? American Neuro-Scientists Mimics Dr. Frankenstein in Ambitious Study

Ambitious Technology

However, one of the main obstacles, among many, that must be overcome is the inability of the medicine to adequately repair spinal cord and nerve damage. If this is not achieved, any recipient of the head transplant may be paralyzed from below the neck.

The company is currently recruiting specialists to help them overcome such issues, hoping that the release of their plans would attract global talent onboard.

According to BrainBridge, they expect the project to result in breakthroughs in full body transplants and spinal cord reconstructions in the short term. However, in the long-term, they plan to expand it to cover areas that may transform healthcare.

Hashem Al-Ghaili, a science communicator and biotechnologist who leads the project, says that experts from various fields have been evaluating the research. Al-Ghaili adds that the goal of technology is to push medical science's boundaries and offer innovative solutions to those who are dealing with life-threatening conditions.

Al-Ghaili explains that each step of the concept must be thought out carefully based on extensive scientific data and research that various experts have conducted in several fields.

BrainBridge claims that the first actual surgery may be performed within a span of eight years.

While the scientific community has not responded to the work, BrainBridge is actually not the first to delve into this field. Other names in the space of brain-computer interface include Emotive, Neurable, Nextmind, Kernel, and Elon Musk's Neuralink.

While head transplants may be part of the future and are quite far away, advancements, if ethically done, could bring milestones in healthcare, especially when it comes to spinal cord damage.

SOVIET DOG HEAD EXPERIMENT

1940

Alexander Bogdanov - Monoskop

Red Star, 1908/1984. Download.

It seemed to me that in your arms I felt your entire youthful world. Its despotism, its egoism, its desperate thirst for happiness—all of this was in your caresses. Your love is like murder.

But – I love you, Lenni.

Alexander Bogdanov, ‎Loren R. Graham, ‎Richard Stites (1908/1984). Red Star: The First Bolshevik Utopia. p. 9

A.I.

Google’s AI Search Feature Faces Criticisms After Giving Dangerous Advice; Users Are Told To Glue Pizza and Eat Rocks

Conelisa N. Hubilla May 25, 2024

(Photo : Pexels/ Eren Li)

Social media users have received strange and dangerous search responses, which appear to have been provided by Google's new AI Overview feature.

Issues With Google's New AI Tool

On May 14, Google launched a new feature for its long-standing search business. It has updated its search engine with an AI tool, known as AI Overviews, which was designed to help users grasp a topic quickly by combining information from different sources.

However, the new feature is currently facing criticisms after providing erratic, inaccurate responses. According to different social media and news reports, the said AI has reportedly told users to add glue to their pizzas, eat rocks, and clean their washing machines with chlorine. In another instance, the AI suggests jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge when a user searched: "I'm feeling depressed."

The experimental tool summarizes search results using the Gemini AI model. It has been rolled out to some users in the U.S. before the planned worldwide release for later this year.

AI Overview has already caused widespread dismay across social media. Users claim that, on some occasions, the AI tool generated summaries using articles from comedic Reddit posts and satirical website The Onion as its sources.

According to a screenshot posted on X, one user made a query about pizza, which received the response: "You can also add about ⅛ cup of non-toxic glue to the sauce to give it more tackiness." After tracing the answer back, it appears to be based on a decade-old joke which was posted as a comment on Reddit.

Other inaccurate responses include claims that former US President John Adams graduated from the University of Wisconsin 21 times, that Barack Obama is a muslim, that users should eat a rock a day to aid their digestion, and that a dog played in the NHL, NBA, and NFL.

In response to the erroneous results, Google representatives claimed that the examples were not common queries and are not representative of most people's experiences. The company also stated that they performed extensive testing before launching the new AI tool. They also claim to take action against violations of their policies as they continue to refine their overall systems.

How Does Google Overviews Work?

Google AI Overviews refer to a combination of search results, which are summarized by AI. The combined information is taken from web pages in search results as well as Google's own knowledge base.

Formerly known as Google Search Generative Experience (SGE), AI Overviews is powered by the Gemini language model. It aims to give a quick understanding of a search topic by presenting information so the user does not need to scan through articles to find the answers they are looking for.

Responses from AI Overview are placed at the top of the search results page before human-written results. The information provided by the new tool is scoured from the web pages below them, and are cited as sources in the overview. Under the AI-generated summary, the page displays the links to all the resources used, which can be clicked to check where the information is pulled from.

As new tools flourish, AI 'fingerprints' on scientific papers could damage trust in vital research

By Oceane Duboust

Published on 16/05/2024 - 15:33

Experts are warning that the "fingerprints" of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) can be found in scientific papers, including peer-reviewed ones.

Are some researchers using too much artificial intelligence (AI) in their scientific papers? Experts say that "fingerprints" of generative AI (GenAI) can be found in an increasing number of studies.

A recent preprint paper, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed yet, estimated that at least 60,000 papers were probably "polished" using AI in some way by analysing the writing style.

"It's not to say that we knew how much LLM [large language model] work was involved in them, but certainly, these are immensely high shifts overnight," Andrew Gray, a librarian at University College London, told Euronews Next, adding that these types of "fingerprints" can be expected even if the tools were used for mere copyediting.

While certain shifts can be linked to changes in how people write, the evolution of some words is "staggering".

"Based on what we're seeing, those numbers look like they're going steadily up," Gray said.

It has already started causing waves. A peer-reviewed study with AI-generated pictures that the authors openly credited to the Midjourney tool was published in the journal Frontiers in Cell Development and Biology and went viral on social media in February.

The journal has since retracted the study and apologised "to the scientific community".

"There's very few that explicitly mention the use of ChatGPT and similar tools," Gray said about the papers he analysed.

New tools pose trust issues

While GenAI may help speed up the editing process, such as when an author is not a native speaker of the language they are writing in, a lack of transparency regarding the use of these tools is concerning, according to experts.

"There is concern that experiments, for example, are not being carried out properly, that there is cheating at all levels," Guillaume Cabanac, a professor of computer science at the University of Toulouse, told Euronews Next.

Nicknamed a "deception sleuth" by Nature, Cabanac tracks fake science and dubious papers.

"Society gives credit to science but this credit can be withdrawn at any time," he added, explaining that misusing AI tools could damage the public’s trust in scientific research.

With colleagues, Cabanac developed a tool called the Problematic Paper Screener to detect "tortured phrases" – those that are found when a paraphrasing tool is used, for example, to avoid plagiarism detection.

But since the GenAI tools went public, Cabanac started noticing a trend of new fingerprints appearing in papers such as the term "regenerate," a button appearing at the end of AI chatbots’ answers, or sentences beginning with "As an AI language model".

They are telltale signs of text that was taken from an AI tool.

“I only detect a tiny fraction of what I assume to be produced today, but it's enough to establish a proof of concept,” Cabanac said.

One of the issues is that AI-generated content will likely be increasingly difficult to spot as the technology progresses.

“It's very easy for these tools to subtly change things, or to change things in a way that maybe you didn't quite anticipate with a secondary meaning. So, if you're not checking it carefully after it's gone through the tool, there's a real risk of errors creeping in,” Gray said.

Harder to spot in the future

The peer-reviewed process is meant to prevent any blatant mistakes from appearing in the journals, but it’s not often the case as Cabanac points out on social media.

Some publishers have released guidelines regarding the use of AI in submitted publications.

The journal Nature said in 2023 that an AI tool could not be a credited author on a research paper, and that any researchers using AI tools must document their use.

Gray fears that these papers will be harder to spot in the future.

"As the tools get better, we would expect fewer really obvious [cases]," he said, adding that publishers should give "serious thought" to the guidelines and expected disclosure.

Both Gray and Cabanac urged authors to be cautious, with Cabanac calling to flag suspicious papers and regularly check for retracted ones.

"We can't allow ourselves to quote, for example, a study or a scientific article that has been retracted," Cabanac said.

"You always have to double-check what you're basing your work on".

He also questioned the soundness of the peer-reviewing process which proved deficient in some cases.

"Making assessments badly, too quickly or helped by ChatGPT without rereading, that's not good for science," he said.

Generative AI and Democracy:

Impacts and Interventions

Published: 25 May 2024

DOWNLOAD

Generative AI and Democracy: Impacts and Interventions

AUTHOR INFO
Elizabeth Seger

Director of CASM

This week’s election announcement has set all political parties firmly into campaign mode and over the next 40 days the public will be weighing up who will get their vote on 4th July.

This democratic moment, however, will take place against the backdrop of a new and largely untested threat; generative-AI. In the lead up to the election, the strength of our electoral integrity is likely to be tested by the spread of AI-generated content and deepfakes – an issue that over 60% of the public are concerned about, according to recent Demos and Full Fact polling.

Our new paper takes a look at the near and long-term solutions at our disposal for bolstering the resilience of our democratic institutions amidst the modern technological age. We explore the top four pressing mechanisms by which generative-AI challenges the stability of democracy, and how to mitigate them.

Last month, Demos, alongside key partners, issued an Open Letter calling on all UK political parties to form a cross-party agreement on their responsible use of generative AI ahead of the election. The open letter is backed by trusted organisations such as Full Fact and the Electoral Reform Society, leading universities, and key figures including Martin Lewis, Founder and Chair of Money Saving Expert and the Money and Mental Policy Institute (MMHPI), and Wikipedia Founder, Jimmy Wales.

Read the full Open Letter here.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment