publishing Archives - usatoday24

publishing matters more than research

May 8, 2026 by usatoday24

During last March ICML (International Conference on Machine Learning), the academic conference dedicated to machine learning (machine learning) oldest in the world, rejected 497 scientific articles at once after detecting that 506 reviewers had resorted to the artificial intelligence (AI) to write your evaluations. They had violated a rule which they themselves had agreed to respect. This conference is organized by the International Machine Learning Society (IMLS), a non-profit organization, and has been held annually since 1980. Every year, researchers working in the field of AI submit their scientific papers in late January or early February to ICML. Those papers They are reviewed by a committee made up of other researchers in this field with the purpose of evaluating them and publishing them if they finally pass a thorough review that normally lasts several months. Decisions to accept or reject articles are usually communicated to authors during the month of May, and the ICML conference is usually held in July. Publish in ICML, NeurIPS (Conference and Workshop on Neural Information Processing Systems) or ICLR (International Conference on Learning Representations) is equivalent to what in other disciplines it would be to publish in the scientific journals Nature or Science. But ICML has a serious problem: its authority is being questioned in r/MachineLearninga Reddit community specialized in machine learning which has more than 2.5 million subscribers. A perversion where reviewers don’t have time to review Before moving forward, it is worth stopping at a very important milestone: the number of scientific articles received by ICML is growing overwhelmingly year after year. In 2023 it received 6,538 papersand in 2024 no less than 9,653 articles, which represents a growth of 48%. The root of the problem lies in the fact that the number of qualified reviewers is not increasing with the same rhythm as the number of scientific articles that need to be evaluated. As I mentioned a few lines above, ICML rules establish that reviewers cannot lightly resort to AI to carry out their evaluations because this procedure can introduce bias. In fact, a study carried out on ICLR 2024 has revealed that scientific articles evaluated with AI models They tend to receive higher scores than those reviewed with the conventional procedure. This is the problem. For the 2026 edition, ICML offered evaluators to choose between two policies: one that prohibited the use of AI and another that allowed it, but with conditions. Only those who chose the first option and failed to comply were sanctioned. Of the 506 offenders, only 398 were reciprocal evaluators who had submitted a ‘paper’ However, there is one relevant fact that is worth not overlooking: the 497 scientific articles that were rejected in March of this year were reviewed by offending reciprocal evaluators. This simply means that they are researchers who simultaneously act as authors and reviewers, so their scientific article was penalized due to their violation of the ICML rules of conduct. Of the 506 offenders, only 398 were reciprocal evaluators who had submitted a paper. Interestingly, the detection system that ICML has used consists of hiding specific instructions within the PDFs of articles pending review. Those instructions are invisible to a human reader, but any AI model processing the document interprets them and includes specific, trackable phrases in the evaluation. ICML has not used generic AI detectors. Of course, each case detected was manually verified to verify that a violation had actually been committed when preparing the evaluation. What is happening reflects an unappealable reality: the review system has failed and needs to be rebuilt. The reviewers can’t cope. Neither those of ICML, nor those of NeurIPS, nor those of ICLR. The number of qualified reviewers should grow at the same rate that the number of scientific articles that need to be evaluated, and it is not happening. Furthermore, this scenario has introduced another problem: acceptance or rejection decisions have acquired a random aspect that threatens the consistency and reliability of the evaluations. It is still not entirely clear what path should be followed to resolve this problem beyond the need to increase the number of qualified evaluators. One option is to improve the transparency of the review process publishing all evaluations. Even those of rejected articles. The evaluation process could also be transformed into a two-way procedure in which authors also evaluate the quality of the reviews they receive. In this way, the evaluators will have a history that will prove their good work. We will see what strategy the conferences finally implement. In 2027 we will clear up doubts. Image | Charlesdeluvio (Unsplash) More information | ICML In Xataka | With DeepSeek V4, China has gained more than just an AI model: it has unlocked the potential of its domestic chips

The latest publishing sensation is a 410-page billet that talks about something very specific: how to overcome the apocalypse

November 23, 2025 by usatoday24

Another manual for preparationists in case it happens to us the final blackout? Well, not exactly: the recently published in Spanish ‘The Book: The definitive guide to rebuilding civilization’, by the Hungry Minds collective, is much, much more than that: an illustrated encyclopedia that recounts the crucial discoveries that have taken place throughout our history. But it’s not just an instruction book. What is ‘The Book’. Above all, an imposing tome that rejects any pretension of portability: it weighs more than two kilos and its dimensions (approximately 24 x 35 centimeters) make it a a museum piece rather than a table read. 410 pages containing more than 700 original illustrations and now Duomo Editions (who have already faced “difficult” books such as ‘The Ship of Theseus’ or ‘House of Leaves’) publishes in Spain fully translated. There are 23 thematic chapters that make up a progressive itinerary: from basic survival knowledge (obtaining water, lighting a fire, identifying edible plants) to complex conquests such as navigation, aviation, cultural festivals or psychotherapy. How it was born. In December 2020, while the world was still navigating the uncertainty of the pandemic, a collective of artists launched a seemingly far-fetched proposal on Kickstarter: creating a visual encyclopedia to rebuild human civilization after an apocalyptic collapse. The answer exceeded expectations with more than 21,000 patrons and $2.3 million raised: it was the third most successful publishing project in the history of the platform. crowdfunding. Since then, nearly 300,000 copies have been sold worldwide, going far beyond its initial niche of illustrated books. Some precedent. The question of how to reactivate civilization after a cataclysm is not new. British astrobiologist Lewis Dartnell published ‘Open in the Event of an Apocalypse’ in 2014, a manual that became a best-selleralthough it adopted a technical and textual approach, explaining chemical processes and physical principles. The Long Now Foundationa foundation led by Brian Eno and dedicated to promoting thought on a civilizational scale, in a time frame of 10,000 years and as a counterweight to the current accelerated culture, incorporated the work into the ‘Manual for Civilization’ project. Hungry Minds offers a radically different approach. Where Dartnell provides practical instructions, the collective creates a visual artifact that evokes medieval codices. The genesis occurred during the 2020 confinementwhen those responsible asked themselves: if everything stopped, what essential knowledge deserves to be preserved? With the incorporation of Artur Stelmakh, an expert in crowdfunding campaigns, they transformed that philosophical concern into a viable editorial project. Who are Hungry Minds? A decentralized creative studio without physical headquarters: its members (artists, illustrators, scientists and historians) work from different corners of the planet. Illustrator Lev Kaplan, an advertising veteran, took on the art direction of the book and spent months refining each illustration. The initial team was joined by university professors who were experts in specific disciplines, as well as writers, editors and proofreaders who verified the precision of each data. The result fuses historical references ranging from the mysterious Voynich Manuscript from the 15th century (considered the most enigmatic codex in the world) while the conceptual classification draws on the ‘Summa Technologiae’ of the Polish Stanisław Lem. The object-book market. As the entertainment industry migrates towards digital formats (streaming, downloadable files, ebooks), large-format illustrated books exhibit a certain paradoxical health. According to data collected by The Booksellersales of large-format artistic monographs experienced an increase of 70% in the British market, defying the general trend in the sector. In the United States, a similar phenomenon was experienced: Independent bookstores increased their orders for travel titles by 23%, design by 20% and art by 12%, always referring to large formats. This phenomenon responds to a demand that digital files do not satisfy: the tactile and visual experience of the book. He crowdfunding is partly to blame, democratizing editorial projects that traditional publishers would consider unviable. ‘The Book’ was originally published this way, without the backing of a major company, and in fact, Hungry Minds took the experience further, expanding the book’s concept with an experiential pop-up in Manhattan, transforming the book into an immersive installation. In Xataka | A new movement has emerged in the US: ordinary people with AR-15 rifles preparing for a social collapse

More and more people are stopping publishing things on their social networks

August 23, 2025 by usatoday24

There was a time when opening Instagram meant to look out to the life of our friends. A smoking coffee under the Valencia filter, a badly framed selfie on the beach or the pet of a colleague yawning. It was an improvised, domestic showcase, a mural of shared banalities that, paradoxically, made us feel closer. As The New Yorker recalledthat “breakfast photo” represented the utopian dream of social networks: that millions of common people could publish fragments of their lives with minimal intervention, from the most trivial to the most intimate, and that that worldly record became something valuable, a “dynamic file of reality from the ground.” More than a decade later, the landscape is another. Yes in 2018 The BBC calculated That about 40% of the world’s population used social networks, dedicating about two hours a day to share, today users are still connected, but less and less willing to show their lives. From vacuum feed. The decrease in the public use of networks is already evident. According to a Morning Consult report28% of Americans publish less than a year ago, compared to 21% that does more. Among generation Z, just 18% admit to posting daily. In a recent article, the BBC has confirmed the trend: One third of users publishes less than before, with a descent specially pronounced among those under 30. And the phenomenon is not limited to the United States. In Spain, Iab Spain has presented the 16th edition of the Social Network Study 2025in collaboration with praise, which confirms a similar wear: 33%of Internet users have abandoned a platform in the last year, especially X (28%) and Facebook (15%), but also Pinterest (15%) or LinkedIn (12%). The main reasons are the lack of use, loss of interest and boredom. The hangover of publishing. This withdrawal has even its own name. National Public Radio (NPR) He has baptized it as Grid Zero, The Instagram phenomenon in which more and more young, especially from the Z gene, erase all their publications and leave their profiles as a “blank canvas.” Adam Mosseri, Chief of Instagram, acknowledges: “Adolescents spend more time in private messages than in stories, and more in stories than in feed.” Instagram itself has detected that young people prefer ephemeral or private interactions. His cultural researcher Kim Garcia has summarized it as follows: “Gen Z has award to permanence and the fingerprint. They do not want their entire personal change process to be publicly exposed.” According to NPRhe Grid Zero It works as an immune system against digital addiction: hide the feed, take refuge in the intimacy of chats or private accounts is a way of protecting. This modesty contrasts with the millennial era. For those who border medium age today, networks were the natural space of the exhibition. The hangover was predictable, as the writer Kyle Chayka has pointed out In an interview with the BBC: “We learned the disadvantages of sharing your life online during the 2010s.” Unless you want to be an influencer, it is no longer worth it: the disadvantages of publishing are too large and the advantages do not reach. ” Privacy and fear of judgment. The FEED blackout responds to different variables, but the first is the need to take refuge in oneself. According to online psychologymany users choose not to publish to protect their privacy, take care of their mental health and avoid risks such as harassment or unnecessary exposure. However, in the case of gene z the phenomenon is more extreme. The nod mag He explained Digital hyperconcience: a simple “like” can be interpreted as a political or identity statement. The fear of cancellation leads many to interact as little as possible. The young Kanika Mehra (24) He has recognized it for The New Yorker: “We are all voyeurs now: we keep looking, but we no longer post, because publishing generates a ram of vulnerability.” To this climate is added the sensation of inadequacy in the midst of global crises. A waitress in Washington has told The New Yorker that he erased some happy selfies because “with everything that happens in the world, I was ashamed to seem frivolous.” From the social to consumption. Beyond personal motivations, there is an undeniable fact: almost everything we see today in networks is consumed. “The platforms have become less social; they look more like television, full of mercantilized content, lifestyle aspirations and advertising,” Chayka has summarized in the BBC. Besides, The New Yorker also coincides: The feeds are dominated by influencers, war headlines, political propaganda, videos generated by AI and “sponcon.” Amateurism, the initial engine of the networks, was replaced by careful production and light rings. And the data are there to confirm it: Morning Consult He has found that more than half of adults (52%) perceive the content of networks as “repetitive and tired.” And the Wall Street Journal He has pointed out that users feel that “the community is no longer there”; Instead, there is an endless commercial showcase. Although it is not an empty network. Silence in the feed does not mean abandonment of the platforms. On the contrary: we remain connected, but we move to more intimate spaces. Mosseri He has recognized it in an interview cited by WSJ: “All sharing between friends is going to direct messages. Today more photos and videos are sent by Stories, and more for stories than by the feed.” The BBC Reaffirms the turn: Personal content “has been oriented towards individual messages and private groups.” In Spain, the IAB Spain study Confirm What WhatsApp is the most used network: 96% of Internet users use it daily. The social did not disappear: he simply hid. Millennials, the new boomers? This hurts, but we enter generational. Millennials – among the ones I included – we grew up exhibiting our online life. Today we appear as the “digital boomers” in the eyes of the gen Z. from the new code They have explained it with irony: Millennial profiles seem outdated, full of poses, … Read more

Log In

Sign In

Forgot password?

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections