I remember it was technically initiated by the Harvard business school, but it was probably triggered by data colada launching their own investigation.

This speaks to your point.

Recently a Harvard president, Claudine Gay was sacked.

Also Francesca Gino was also punished for her (alleged still ? ) fabrication of data.

So what's the problem ?

Adtech works because there is a lot of money in it. There is a lot of money in it because people seek quick entertainment, and we have a LOT of people driving the demand.

Now compare that to cancer research. There's no short term gratification about it.

I never said we shouldn't.

What I meant by "Change will always be coming. Embrace it.", is to accept it as a reality, be ready for it and prepare for it. That means, be ready to resist negative change and accept positive change.

Even after successfully resisting negative change, the end state may still be different than before. This is what we have to accept and be ready for, mentally.

Nothing lasts forever. Good times will come and go and so would bad times.

I think as humans we are used to small time frames which are proportional to our own lifetime.

But the world: say climate, population, geology etc. moves at a much different cycle, if at all you can call it a cycle since none of the iterations are exactly the same.

So the lesson is this: change is coming. Change will always be coming. Embrace it.

If you like something, you have to struggle to preserve it as much as you can, for as long as you can, but you can never make it permanent.

Of course, they could still sell your data anyway. That's why it's important to pay attention to their T&C.

There's another phenomenon I have been noticing more and more lately: the frequent scene cuts. One scene lasts a mere 3 seconds before being cut to a different scene. Whether it is entirely different scene, or a different angle of the same thing or zoomed in/out.

I am not sure if this phenomenon is due to AI but I sense some correlation there.

Given that they can’t be proven, so it’s effectively unpredictable and “un-generatable” ?

I think we are talking semantics here.

While fraud does require intention to deceive, I get the sentiment that hallucinated citations shouldn't be dismissed as simply carelessness. It should be something stronger than that: gross negligence or something MUCH stronger! There should absolutely be repercussions for this.

But let's not call it fraud. That word is reserved for something specific.

EDIT: someone else said "reckless disregard" equals intent or something to that effect. So I looked it up.

It appears so that is the case. "Reckless Disregard Equals Intent" in legal language.

But I am not sure if this particular clause should apply here. Perhaps it depends on what kind of research is being published? For e.g., if it is related to medical science and has a real consequence on people's health, we can then apply this?

And I think what you are trying to communicate is your disagreement. Which is totally fine.

I don’t claim to be right. I’m here to learn. I accept I could be wrong.

But I’m curious what about comment is so offensive or disagreeable that you felt the need to say what you said.

I am genuinely curious to learn your point of view. Can I ask you to articulate why you disagree with me and more importantly, what your view points are?

And they don't claim to either.

You are the first one I know who said that. Thank you for saying that!

I think his videos are amazing but they are NOT meant to teach you the material.

They are providing a high level intuition which I haven’t found the use for yet.

Perhaps it’s just me, but I do NOT learn from intuition and analogies at all. I need to get lost in the details and rigor first, and then develop my own intuition second, and maybe look at someone else’s intuition third, maybe.

It's another way of doing things and not necessarily incompetence.

It makes sense to me.

Move slowly and deliberately while avoiding big mistakes. As opposed to moving fast and making big mistakes which by comparison is slower.