Tara White
@dignityneurosci.bsky.social
Providing a brain science based approach to universal human rights of agency, uniqueness, unconditional belonging, freedom from want/poverty, freedom from fear, and our protection of the vulnerable.
Reposted by Tara White
The replies to this thread are very funny, but it’s a warning sign that one of the key functions of Googling - the ability to factcheck a quote, verify a source, or track down something half remembered - will get so much harder if AI prefers to legitimate statistical possibilities over actual truth
April 23, 2025 at 1:48 PM
The replies to this thread are very funny, but it’s a warning sign that one of the key functions of Googling - the ability to factcheck a quote, verify a source, or track down something half remembered - will get so much harder if AI prefers to legitimate statistical possibilities over actual truth
Reposted by Tara White
3/5) The real mechanism for credibility in science is simply the test of time:
Can someone reproduce the results?
Do others build on the findings?
Real rigour in science comes from waiting to see whether a result holds and leads to new results.
Period - that's it. It's not peer review.
Can someone reproduce the results?
Do others build on the findings?
Real rigour in science comes from waiting to see whether a result holds and leads to new results.
Period - that's it. It's not peer review.
April 22, 2025 at 5:57 PM
3/5) The real mechanism for credibility in science is simply the test of time:
Can someone reproduce the results?
Do others build on the findings?
Real rigour in science comes from waiting to see whether a result holds and leads to new results.
Period - that's it. It's not peer review.
Can someone reproduce the results?
Do others build on the findings?
Real rigour in science comes from waiting to see whether a result holds and leads to new results.
Period - that's it. It's not peer review.