Leading Scientific Journal Humiliated After Publishing Fake AI-Generated Paper About Rat With Giant Penis

submitted by Drewski from zerohedge.com

all 11 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Yeah - the journal fucked up. They expected two reviewers to vet the AI images, which didn't appropriately happen. The article was retracted within 3 days of its publication. The Tory-ograph are of course pissing themselves with excitement that a scientific journal fucked up this badly.

Here is a better article, discussing the idiocy of the reviewers and editors: https://www.vice.com/en/article/dy3jbz/scientific-journal-frontiers-publishes-ai-generated-rat-with-gigantic-penis-in-worrying-incident

Here is the article in full (PDF, with the correct name of the journal): https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/fcell-11-1339390-1.pdf

This is the retraction, 3 days later: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcell.2024.1386861/full

[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So the paper itself wasn't AI generated, just the images?

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes - the reviewer's explanation in the Vice article is that he wasn't responsible for reviewing the images, which makes me wonder if the article was sent to him initially without images. Still, if the managing editor (or reviewer) could not spot those goofy words in the AI images, it's time to reevaluate the editors and the review process. The article is not AI (per zerohedge), and the "giant penis" is not important, as that's typical of an expanded view in a scientific illustration. zerohedge is cancer.

[–]TheBlackSun 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Are YOU AI generated?

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The Tory-ograph are of course pissing themselves with excitement

By reporting on it? Sounds like you are extremely biased and desperate to attack the publication just for exposing something you don't want exposed.

[–]Bitch-Im-a-cow 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

False reporting: the paper is not AI generated and the giant penis is merely the usual expanded view in a scientific paper. The problem had been AI generated images. Have a look.

[–]Drewski[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

archive.today mirror | archive.org mirror

[–]xoenix 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

WTF is that last image supposed to be.

[–]ShoahKahn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Keep the article and throw it into the faces of vax-cattle who parrot "TRUST TEH PEER REVIEWED SCIENTISM, ANTI-VAXXER CHUDS!!"

"YOU TAKE [A VACCINE] AND A YEAR GOES BY, AND EVERYBODY'S FINE. THEN, YOU SAY, 'OKAY ― THAT'S GOOD. NOW, LET'S GIVE IT TO FIVE HUNDRED PEOPLE'. THEN, A YEAR GOES BY AND EVERYTHING'S FINE. SO... WELL, THEN, LET'S GIVE IT TO THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE... AND THEN YOU FIND OUT THAT IT TAKES TWELVE YEARS FOR ALL HELL TO BREAK LOOSE; AND THEN, WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!"

~ Dr. Anthony Fauci (Feb. 1999) ― https://streamable.com/dr3wvh

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://youtu.be/-Rck_NqhKjc

[–]CheeseWizard 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh yeah? Looks legit to me. You're all laughing now, but you won't be laughing when a rat with a giant dick comes for humanity, with his friends orb rat and rat onion.

Those three, together with Stuart Little, forms the four rats of apocalypse.