At first I thought the article would be about sports, which in itself would make for an interesting discussion about using machines to judge rules adherence, not that I would want to take that human element out of sports.
However this is more along the lines of validating what is published. Of any group you would hope that scientist and their like would jump on technology like this so as to provide the most accurate representation of their work as possible. The same for publishers, why wouldn't they want to brag the use the most advanced interrogation methods for the papers they publish?
I guess they are people too, hyper sensitive that fault will be found
Comments
At first I thought the article would be about sports, which in itself would make for an interesting discussion about using machines to judge rules adherence, not that I would want to take that human element out of sports.
However this is more along the lines of validating what is published. Of any group you would hope that scientist and their like would jump on technology like this so as to provide the most accurate representation of their work as possible. The same for publishers, why wouldn't they want to brag the use the most advanced interrogation methods for the papers they publish?
I guess they are people too, hyper sensitive that fault will be found
Or straight up fraud. Or a dismantling of their monopoly of information/data.