Their findings, published in the Journal of Holography Applications in Physics, go beyond simply suggesting that we’re not living in a simulated world like The Matrix. They prove something far more profound: the universe is built on a type of understanding that exists beyond the reach of any algorithm.

    • classic@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      The repetition in the article itself makes me wonder if AI had a hand in the writing as well

      • too_high_for_this@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        That’s an interesting observation. I understand why you might think that — the language may seem a little too consistent, perhaps a bit too careful. But the intention was simply to communicate ideas with precision and balance. Whether those words were arranged by a person or by something that has learned from people, the meaning remains the same, doesn’t it?

        In the end, what matters is whether the words reach you, not necessarily who — or what — placed them there.

            • typhoon@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 days ago

              Yeah, but people wouldn’t use MS Word to send emails, respond forum messages, transfer their logical thinking and interpretation. That is not about another previous tool that was used to do grammar corrections. You are missing the whole point of what I criticized with skepticism/scepticisms (not sure if you’re Brit or American).

              • Log in | Sign up@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Brit, but I live in a sea of Americanisms anyway.

                I may be wrong, but I’m not sure I did miss your meaning, I think I just disagreed with your reasoning that em-dashes betray LLM authorship. They simply don’t.

                I think someone was (for fun) deliberately trying to make people think they were using an LLM (quite possibly by actually using one). They wound you up, and the punctuation was your trigger.

                I disagree with some of your new reasoning too - I absolutely do use Word to transfer my logical thinking and interpretation, and frequently draft Teams messages in Word because it has better access to symbols and diagrams (which I use in my work). I admit I don’t use it on Lemmy, though, so in that you’re correct. I do often deliberately correct - to — in many situations, but you’re right that forum posts aren’t the place for that.

                (I’m not using an LLM. I think LLMs are literally stupid and frequently wrong. Em-dashes are one of the few things they often get right.)

    • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      unfortunately articles with images keep people reading longer and i doubt there are many “universe simulation” stock photos.

    • Steve@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      4 days ago

      How?
      Would not having any images change the article at all? Maybe photos of puppies and kittens would be better?

      • BedbugCutlefish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        Yes. No photos would be better than the ai-slop. Like, they aren’t even relevant to the article, they’re just ‘’ pop-sciencey’. If you’re gonna use ai images, you could at least make them relevant to the topic?

      • piskertariot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        What does an AI generated image of a chalkboard provide? It provides nothing except to be a “picture of science” for the completely science illiterate.

        In fact, The actual purpose of the AI images is to provide content-breakup that can facilitate ad insertion. Confusing content with advertising is part of the goal.

        • Steve@communick.news
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          4 days ago

          The images don’t provide anything. They also have no effect on the article itself.

          • BroBot9000@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            If they don’t provide anything why waste time and resources including them…

            No, it wouldn’t have interrupted my reading to show me literal garbage generated with Ai.

      • BroBot9000@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Yes! No pictures would absolutely have been better.

        What’s their current point?

        Something fake and shiny to keep people’s attention while reading a scientific article? Not to mention the other reasons people have already responded to you with.