I do not understand why we are all piling on one paper. Is there anything obviously wrong with it, aside from personal views on length? Any data anomalies ...
Michael 英泉 Eisen on Twitter / X
ALSO WHY THE FUCK ARE WE STILL JUST CITING PAPERS INSTEAD OF SPECIFIC PIECES OF DATA OR CLAIMS? https://t.co/dngS9d8nOW— Michael 英泉 Eisen (@mbeisen) May 16, 2026
Ravid Shwartz Ziv on Twitter / X
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
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
joão (@johnfields091.bsky.social)
Lisboa/Portugal Books, comics, records/music, films, games (interests, not activities). Mostly random thoughts in short form here, and in long(ish)-form on my blog. https://sobreiromecanico.tumblr.com/ (Photo: Eurasian Eagle Owl by Paul Bankowitsch)
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.
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
Maximillian Piras on Twitter / X
Not sure when my @aiDotEngineer talk will be posted, so for those who asked here's a link to my slides (couldn't add notes so if you anything needs explanation just reply here & I'll thread the context): https://t.co/O1yg63iR3D https://t.co/yerleRwzHp pic.twitter.com/WTK82rPmDG— Maximillian Piras (@MVXMXM) June 14, 2025
A Claude Skill that Makes LLM Paragraphs More Bearable
And they said studying Christensen's rhetoric of the sentence was a waste of time...
Zechen Zhang on Twitter / X
1/ For nearly 350 years, science has communicated itself through one object: the paper. A linear narrative, frozen as a PDF, written for a human reader. We've come to treat that format as the medium of science itself.It doesn't have to be. It's a historical artifact. 🧵 pic.twitter.com/P5UUhceLkC— Zechen Zhang (@ZechenZhang5) April 30, 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
What, Me Worry?
My initial assessment of this paper ⬇️ was brief, so let’s have a better look at it: 🧵
Joachim Goedhart
Time-resolved fluorescent proteins expand fluorescent microscopy in temporal and spectral domains. Is it impressive? Yes Is it new? No Should you use it? Probably not. cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674%2825…
