almost? we're in the middle of a decades long ongoing scandal centered on gaming the system.

I’m not in academia, but I’ve seen my coworkers’ hard work get crunched into a slop machine by higher ups who think it’s a good cleanup filter.

LLMs are legitimately amazing technology for like six specific use cases but I’m genuinely worried that my own hard work can be defaced that way. Or worse, that someone else in the chain of custody of my work (let’s say, the person advising me who would be reviewing my paper in an academic context) decided to do the same, and suddenly this is attached to my name permanently.

Absurd, terrifying, genuinely upsetting misuse of technology. I’ve been joking about moving to the woods much more frequently every month for the past two years.

The truly diabolical way is to add an image to your resume somewhere. Something discrete that fits the theme, like your signature or a QR code to your website. Then hide the white text behind that. A bot will still scan the text just fine… But a human reader won’t even see it when they highlight the document, because the highlighted text will be behind the image.

I wouldn't do that on your resume. Lots of these systems detect hidden text and highlight it for reviewers. I probably would see that as a negative when reviewing them.

in one of these preprints there were traces of prompt used for writing paper itself too

My merit review this year specifically noted my high volume of peer review for why I exceeded expectations in the 20% service part of my contract. Again I say, faculty are remunerated for peer review. It's better to do peer review for the service part of my contract than it is to sit on faculty senate. Doing peer review helps my research. It's a win-win, unless I don't want to get my full merit raise because i ignored service.