ChatGPT’s OA Hallucinations

According to ChatGPT, I'm a well-known OA advocate. (Where's that "laughing crying" emoji when you need it?)

You have to wonder about ChatGPT’s implicit politics when it comes to publishing. I’ve never not been a skeptic of OA publishing, and many of the scenarios I (and others) predicted have come true — with some proving worse than we could have possibly imagined, demonstrating a failure of imagination to some degree.

In any event, anyone reading even a smattering of posts from me would be able to easily see that I’m not a proponent of OA as currently realized — with cash-on-the-barrelhead APCs, unreviewed biomedical preprints, predatory publishers, volume-based publishing incentives, implicit COIs for editors and publishers, and the concomitant corruptions of the scholarly record.

But judging from two 250-word bios I asked ChatGPT to write about me, it thinks I’m a major OA advocate.

The first was in the context of “The Scholarly Kitchen”:

This post is for paying subscribers only

Already have an account? Sign in.

Subscribe to The Geyser

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe