this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
37 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

1427 readers
129 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Need to let loose a primal scream without collecting footnotes first? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.

Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.

If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.

The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)

Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.

Last week's thread

(Semi-obligatory thanks to @dgerard for starting this)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Folks, I need some expert advice. Thanks in advance!

Our NSF grant reviews came in (on Saturday), and two of the four reviews (an Excellent AND a Fair, lol) have confabulations and [insert text here brackets like this] that indicate that they are LLM generated by lazy people. Just absolutely gutted. It's like an alien reviewed a version of our grant application from an parallel dimension.

Who do I need to contact to get eyes on the situation, other than the program director? We get to simmer all day today since it was released on the weekend, so at least I have an excuse to slow down and be thoughtful.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I haven't had to report malfeasance like that, but if that happened to me, I would be livid. I'd start by contacting the program officer; I'd also contact the division director above them and the NSF Office of Inspector General. I mean, that level of laziness can't just have affected one review! And, for good measure, I'd send a tip to 404media, as they have covered this sort of thing. That might well go nowhere, but it can't hurt to be in their contact list.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Total amateur here, but from quickly reviewing the process it looks like the program officer would be your primary point of contact within NSF to address this kind of thing? But then I would assume they read the reviews themselves before passing them back to you so I would hope they would notice? The bit of my brain that's watched too much TV would like to see them answer some questions from an AI skeptic journalist, but that's not exactly a great avenue for addressing your specific problem.

Mostly commenting to make it easier to keep track of the thread tbh. Thats some kinda nonsense you're dealing with here.