Scott Adams

And the risk here is that it's skewing trials and it's skewing patient care that these things might convince doctors to act differently and it might not be accurate.

So that's fun.

but it does look like they're at least finding them.

So that's a good thing that they're coming up with learning tools.

Well, I think Scott would probably start with all data is fake and all data that matters is fake.

And I think he'd probably, you know, say you can't really trust any of this stuff.

And I don't know, he, he wouldn't, I don't think he'd be surprised by it at all.

He probably would have also said, just ask Scott, what do you think?

Yeah, I mean, it'd be interesting to know the business model behind a lot of this stuff.

I think part of it is just people beefing up their own credentials, because I think, you know, you do have this publish or perish thing that you have to keep your job as a researcher, you have to put out studies.

And so I think the more studies you put out, and the more of those are cited by other studies, the more status you get in the scientific community.

And so you might get promoted, or you might get

more grants or you might get more funding.

And so I think that's the business model behind it is that every study says, hey, we need to also study this other thing that's related to this.

And so it's basically setting you up to ask for another grant.

And so I think that it's really, you know, probably using AI in many cases.

But these paper mills are just churning out papers.

And I think they're even selling them to scientists that don't want to write them themselves for some reason.

And it's a bunch of fraud.

But I think that's... Is that going to change or is it going to just be like that?