The problem with Anthropic's consciousness paperMy last post got more attention than I expected, and the question I keep getting is some version of "okay, so what is actually wrong with the paper?". Let me try to explain.First, the core result is fine. Reading out…— Ravid Shwartz Ziv (@ziv_ravid) July 7, 2026
Eric Topol on Twitter / X
This is a FRAUDULENT paper, AI-generated. My name was used as an author and I had nothing to do with it, never saw it until today https://t.co/Ky60zJrMEZThe "Editors" Angelo Rossi Mori, David Mensah, and Zarnie Khadjesari should be reported. pic.twitter.com/2Z5CE8w4bn— Eric Topol (@EricTopol) April 22, 2026
Cas (Stephen Casper) on Twitter / X
It is hard to overstate how disappointing I think this new paper from Oxford, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google (et al) is. I can't take it seriously as academic work, just as propaganda. It also has some very bad scholarship and questionable adherence to research ethics. Having… pic.twitter.com/Z5fBx360ya— Cas (Stephen Casper) (@StephenLCasper) May 13, 2026
233. "The Illusion of Thinking" — Thoughts on This Important Paper
This is a fantastic paper. I just love it. tl;dr AI is not human. Anthropomorphization has been bad for AI, LLMs, and Chat. Clippy walked so today's AI could run.
Andreas De Block on Twitter / X
It took Nature three years to publish this rebuttal, which clearly demonstrates the fundamental flaws in the original paper. In the meantime, the paper's conclusions influenced scientific debate and policy decisions. Such delays in correcting flawed research do real damage. https://t.co/QI3Ei3PE70— Andreas De Block (@DeblockBlock) August 13, 2026
Dan Singleton 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ on Twitter / X
1. Ok, this is the thread to end all threads, or possibly my career. I am about to trash a new paper in @sciencemagazine, its editors, its reviewers, C&E News, others who stated or wrote adoring commentaries, anyone who looked at the paper or its commentaries without seeing pic.twitter.com/K5O1cX1BJP— Dan Singleton 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️ (@dasingleton) April 8, 2019
Thomas G. Dietterich on Twitter / X
We are seeing a new trend in submissions to @arxiv (and presumably to conferences and journals): Authors submitting papers whose contents they likely do not understand. 1/— Thomas G. Dietterich (@tdietterich) September 13, 2026
Itai Yanai on Twitter / X
Is the scientific paper a fraud? Peter Medawar (Nobel Prize winner) suggested that publications are overly structured and formal, giving only a sanitized version of the discovery without revealing the thought process that actually led to it. pic.twitter.com/E3ttRPzcfL— Itai Yanai (@ItaiYanai) October 27, 2024
Gautam Kamath on Twitter / X
Nihar Shah did a heroic experiment for TMLR: he spent 20-25 hours over two weeks interviewing authors of seemingly low-quality submissions about their own papers. He confirmed what we all suspected: people submitting these papers have *no idea* what is going on in them. https://t.co/6CJF152u7I— Gautam Kamath (@thegautamkamath) September 16, 2026
WSJ Article Claiming China Has Matched Anthropic Is Obvious Nonsense
The Wall Street Journal printed an outright false headline and heavily misleading story claiming this, which of course was uncritically amplified by the usual suspects.
Ferhat Tura on Twitter / X
I have recently detected minor mistakes in the codes of a paper published in a high-quality journal and contacted the lead author first!, who acknowledged the mistake and contacted the journal. I thanked the author for doing open science and now we are collaborating on a paper💪— Ferhat Tura (@FerhatTura19) May 15, 2024
Hilde Kuehne on Twitter / X
I'm currently writing and editing ICLR submission (and yes, I'm a dinosaur. I still do this by hand, no AI, just a spell checker) and I realized that when I work on a paper, at every step I try to imagine how someone would read this. Is the information clear? Will they get the…— Hilde Kuehne (@HildeKuehne) September 25, 2026
This is a FRAUDULENT paper, AI-generated. My name was used as an author and I had nothing to do with it, never saw it until today e-pubmed.co.uk/journals/digital-health-imple… The "Editors" Angelo Rossi Mori, David Mensah, and Zarnie Khadjesari and this "Journal" should be reported.
"This paper prompted Jack Clark, one of the co-founders of Anthropic to post this to their news letter: 'the singularity could be delayed'".
Mark Riedl
Fascinating experiment: current AI systems lack creativity to reliably pursue research arxiv.org/abs/2607.27191 - poor judgment about the bar for publishable research - uncreative responses in research design - ineffective backtracking from dead ends - poor resource awareness - instruction drift
This is a FRAUDULENT paper, AI-generated. My name was used as an author and I had nothing to do with it, never saw it until today e-pubmed.co.uk/journals/digital-health-imple… The "Editors" Angelo Rossi Mori, David Mensah, and Zarnie Khadjesari and this "Journal" should be reported.
