I'm curious about the SciSpace tool and how it might enhance productivity or research efficiency. By the way, I'm currently using Undetectable AI's essay writer tool, and it's been quite helpful for crafting well-structured content!
Also, if the app is prompting us to cite references that we haven't actually read, is that not unethical and something of a cop out? I realize we might read an abstract or intro and include a citation to refer to literature in the broad sense, but there will be the temptation to write and auto insert prompted literature that has not been read or thought about by the author. Ethical?
you are right, but what you are describing is an unethical use of an ethical tool :) Without this tool, are people not tempted to include references to something they haven't read? I have seen this over and over again, and done by the respected and established members of academic community, not even students! Why would we worry about someone who is not serious about their desire to progress and learn? This has always been a problem, we have only been changing the tools we are using. Also, I feel like having such quick access to that literature may actually Improve the likelihood that someone will actually bother to go and read that source, instead of citing it without trying to find and read it.
I think what the commenter might be alluding to is that these tools could actually encourage people to use them "unethically." Having easier access might also make it tempting for some to take shortcuts instead of fully engaging with the material to understand it. Even though it has "always been a problem," that doesn’t change the concern about encouraging unethical behavior.
I don't know any other guy like you who is soo perfect in research field ...And I know really a large number of professors. Although I'm still a student but yes I do appreciate your content and effort. You really saves us a lot of time and guide our researches in right direction
Haven't heard of that one, so cannot comment. And no, I do not think this makes academics redundant in the slightest. It is simply that their role may change, nothing wrong with that
But it's really costly for some students like us 😂😂.It just gives 200 words for free and then a cooldown time of approx 2-3 hours . Also can have only 1 reference that's it...
As someone who works in science, I find AI generated text low quality, in general, not only in scientific writing. I think our time as humans is just too valuable to waste it reading text written by a computer. Also, if a sufficiently intelligent AI works non-stop while writing the document, how much CO2 emissions will generate writing one page? A good search engine for references is useful. AI is useful to give some inspiration, and to fix some style and phrasing issues in already written text. But text written from scratch by AI, for me it's even irritating to read, it's such a pile of cliches and bullshit.
Agree 100% I did stress several times in the video that I would normally use it to complement the writing, rather than handing the task over to it completely
I have just tried Scispace writer. When citing a document (which I uploaded), and asking it to continue a train of thought it hallucinates and invents complete gibberish that has nothing to do with the cited document. Completely useless and very dangerous.
I absolutely agree with your claim and think that using such tools enables to in the end write better work and provide more value But if I tell my supervisor that I’m using a tool like this he would punish me for it Even if I proposed to do coding line by line, he said that it’s utter nonsense cause he’s used to a different method…
@@qualitativeresearcher też pozdrawiam, uczelnia akurat niemiecka pomogła mi docenić polskie uczelnie bardzo doceniam twój kanał i fajnie tłumaczysz materiały, dzięki! :)
Shows that you have a real problem with critical thinking. You were indoctrinated to believe that it is ok to judge a person solely on their ability to Write Academically, where in practice it is not only more important to convey the message with any means possible (because at the end of the day, knowledge sharing should be the goal of scholars), you are also completely ignorant of people who may be not good at writing, either because of their skillset or various conditions such as dyslexia
Visit my website and explore the different ways in which I can support you and your study! drkriukow.com/my-services/
I'm curious about the SciSpace tool and how it might enhance productivity or research efficiency. By the way, I'm currently using Undetectable AI's essay writer tool, and it's been quite helpful for crafting well-structured content!
Also, if the app is prompting us to cite references that we haven't actually read, is that not unethical and something of a cop out? I realize we might read an abstract or intro and include a citation to refer to literature in the broad sense, but there will be the temptation to write and auto insert prompted literature that has not been read or thought about by the author. Ethical?
you are right, but what you are describing is an unethical use of an ethical tool :) Without this tool, are people not tempted to include references to something they haven't read? I have seen this over and over again, and done by the respected and established members of academic community, not even students! Why would we worry about someone who is not serious about their desire to progress and learn? This has always been a problem, we have only been changing the tools we are using. Also, I feel like having such quick access to that literature may actually Improve the likelihood that someone will actually bother to go and read that source, instead of citing it without trying to find and read it.
I think what the commenter might be alluding to is that these tools could actually encourage people to use them "unethically." Having easier access might also make it tempting for some to take shortcuts instead of fully engaging with the material to understand it. Even though it has "always been a problem," that doesn’t change the concern about encouraging unethical behavior.
@@JusPri Same applies to knifes. But still, it's a tool as well.
Can I ask to write sugstions based only i na list of literature reviews in PDF ai uploaded?
not sure but I think you can try that with a Free tool that I reviewed in another video - NotebookLM
I don't know any other guy like you who is soo perfect in research field ...And I know really a large number of professors.
Although I'm still a student but yes I do appreciate your content and effort. You really saves us a lot of time and guide our researches in right direction
Wow, thanks! This means a lot to me. Hope that my content will continue to inspire you then!
So in terms of features how is it better than Jenni AI? And does this not make academics redundant?
Haven't heard of that one, so cannot comment. And no, I do not think this makes academics redundant in the slightest. It is simply that their role may change, nothing wrong with that
But it's really costly for some students like us 😂😂.It just gives 200 words for free and then a cooldown time of approx 2-3 hours . Also can have only 1 reference that's it...
Didn't know that, not something I have any influence over, I'm afraid! :)
I lecture undergrad students throughout the year, and unfortunately, many would use this tool irresponsibly. Great tool though.
I can definitely imagine that ! Gonna be very challenging to address this issue in the years to come
As someone who works in science, I find AI generated text low quality, in general, not only in scientific writing. I think our time as humans is just too valuable to waste it reading text written by a computer. Also, if a sufficiently intelligent AI works non-stop while writing the document, how much CO2 emissions will generate writing one page? A good search engine for references is useful. AI is useful to give some inspiration, and to fix some style and phrasing issues in already written text. But text written from scratch by AI, for me it's even irritating to read, it's such a pile of cliches and bullshit.
Agree 100% I did stress several times in the video that I would normally use it to complement the writing, rather than handing the task over to it completely
I have just tried Scispace writer. When citing a document (which I uploaded), and asking it to continue a train of thought it hallucinates and invents complete gibberish that has nothing to do with the cited document. Completely useless and very dangerous.
I had really good experiences with it, but good to know that it is not always accurate
I absolutely agree with your claim and think that using such tools enables to in the end write better work and provide more value
But if I tell my supervisor that I’m using a tool like this he would punish me for it
Even if I proposed to do coding line by line, he said that it’s utter nonsense cause he’s used to a different method…
Unfortunately, this is and will be the main barrier :/ People who refuse to go with the times! Pozdrawiam :)
@@qualitativeresearcher też pozdrawiam, uczelnia akurat niemiecka pomogła mi docenić polskie uczelnie
bardzo doceniam twój kanał i fajnie tłumaczysz materiały, dzięki! :)
@@bartekbinda6978 dzieki za pozytywny komentarz! i mam nadzieje ze moje materialy będą pomocne !
If you think this is not unethical then you should NOT be in academia imo. #shameful
Shows that you have a real problem with critical thinking. You were indoctrinated to believe that it is ok to judge a person solely on their ability to Write Academically, where in practice it is not only more important to convey the message with any means possible (because at the end of the day, knowledge sharing should be the goal of scholars), you are also completely ignorant of people who may be not good at writing, either because of their skillset or various conditions such as dyslexia
What are teachers going to do? Jobless?
Definitely not. So much more that the teacher's role involves, can't imagine a little tool like this affecting the profession