Prof. Anima Anandkumar

So I can understand being infuriated, but it doesn't seem like there's any kind of wizard behind the curtain here. Context is expensive, so we need to fix economics of journalism to get what you want, I think

Mark *is* trying to fix the economics of journalism by calling it out. Why push back against that?

(I don't understand how calling this out fixes this - it just drives economic benefit to a problematic article.)

Hmm, suppose enough prominent AI researchers all agreed to consistently call out such articles... you don't think that will create incentives for journalists to try something else? (The other economic issues notwithstanding -- I agree there are other issues at play.)

Maybe. It could also be a disincentive to covering the area, as you (if you're starting out) have an unpredictable risk of public criticism. It feels odd to me as I'm sure there's a way to improve things that doesn't require public disapproval, which feels inherently adversarial

I think this is a really tricky area as loads of it sums to "people who have spent decades studying a subject want someone who has spent hours studying the subject to write with context of people who have spent decades studying the subject"

That does seem to imply that universities should employ more outreach & communications personnel.

Many universities are already bloated with administrators (thankfully not at caltech). Suggesting we add more bloat and spend even less on research and education is problematic