If they want to keep getting work, they can review (=rewrite) the AI slop, for 1/3 of their normal rate (which was already low to begin with)

Readers, we HAVE to complain about it, hold the publishers accountable and boycott these books

I am losing my mind

DO ANY OF THESE JOURNALISTS KNOW THAT VENEZUELA IS NOT ON THE PACIFIC

THAT THE CARIBBEAN SEA DOES NOT TOUCH THE PACIFIC

THAT IN FACT THIS IS WHAT THE PANAMA CANAL WAS BUILT FOR

WTF IS THE EASTERN PACIFIC

PLEASE LOOK AT A MAP

Alternatively: if almost everything one hears about billionnaires is negative, then it follows that the most people have heard of someone, the more negative things they've also heard, and the more negative their opinion.

One thing you can expect of Guide members: fabulous craft skills! Creative and thoughtful placards on show at the demonstration

And even if there was such a thing as people who learn a topic more easily, there's no reason that's gonna correlate with being good at the actual day to day practice of the field and make you a better scientist. The journals you submit to won't how much or how little you had to study in undergrad.

*I* knew what to do. Quotation marks, adding reddit or wikipedia to the search, but those are tricks I've licked and sources I've learned to trust over decades of internet experience.
How is anyone new to the internet supposed to use google? They can't.

I knew it was bad, but it's only when I was briefly a middle school teacher that it truly hit how bad google has become, when I saw my students google. Even with relevant keywords that would have been perfectly fine even in a pre-google search engine the results were trash.