Philosophy, Technology, and the Body—Toward Justice
www.katiaschwerzmann.net
Katia Schwerzmann
Loading...
Exactly. These papers are pointless. They don’t result from the need to discover, explain, clarify, critique, which is what makes science a human endeavor: the desire to both understand something and communicate it. These papers are vampirely sucking off our time, critical thinking, creativity.
Published with some minor changes! Please share widely. 😊
Guest, O., Suarez, M., ... & van Rooij, I. (2026). Against the Uncritical Adoption of 'AI' Technologies in Academia. Digital Culture & Education, 16(2), 85–118. doi.org/10.5281/zeno...
Journal: www.digitalcultureandeducation.com/volume-162
Unbelievable: the amount of cognitive labor being spent to weed out these generated papers and on top of that the reputational damage to researchers such as Louise who has spent years unraveling the political and ethical implications machine learning technology.
Autoritäre Formierung, die
Präsentiert von #CDU, #CSU und #SPD!
1/ My new article is out in AI & Society: “Sexualized deepfakes as a socio-technical continuation of gendered power.”
I argue that sexualized deepfakes are not primarily a problem of deception, misinformation, or “fake media.”
They are technologies of power.
*vampirically. AI survives from the living labor that we inject in it every time we evaluate, rewrite, modify, accept or reject its output.
If a research paper can't answer the "so what?" test, then it doesn't deserve reviewing let alone publishing - and I don't think AI used as a writing assistant is helping authors address that test. /end
