A.I. Learns to Write in DNA
Scientists prompted A.I. to design and create new viruses for the first time, a milestone for medicine that also raises new biosecurity concerns.
Per a discussion gaining traction on Reddit's r/MachineLearning community, arXiv is now actively banning accounts that upload low-quality, AI-generated preprints — and the broader debate is turning to whether the platform's decades-old endorsement system can be restructured to hold the line.
The specific question researchers are debating: should arXiv revoke endorsement privileges from established academics whose sponsored newcomers are submitting machine-generated work? The endorsement model was designed to vouch for submitters' credibility before they could upload papers. It was not designed for a world where producing a convincing-looking research paper takes twenty minutes and a free API key.
arXiv processes roughly 20,000 new preprints per month. Even a modest contamination rate threatens to overwhelm the volunteer moderation layer and erode the platform's standing as the definitive pre-publication record across physics, mathematics, and computer science. Account bans address bad actors; the endorsement reform debate is about closing the structural door.
The harder problem is not identifying the obvious offenders — it is that well-meaning researchers using AI assistance for drafting sit somewhere on a continuum that does not have a clean line. Academic publishing has not drawn that line yet.
All comments are reviewed before appearing. Keep it respectful.
Scientists prompted A.I. to design and create new viruses for the first time, a milestone for medicine that also raises new biosecurity concerns.
The Trump administration has no idea on how to handle open-source and open-weight AI models from China.
Google is consolidating AI leadership in California but the reorganization is pushing out the engineers who built its AI division