[layer8]

This is fine the first few times, but after a few dozens it gets exhausting. This is also not about stifling their curiosity or imagination. It's about understanding that in a field as advanced as physics and cosmology, how incredibly unlikely it is for some layman to come up with a worthwhile idea that hasn't already be tackled. To even be able to explain why an idea is impractical or beside the point, a solid knowledge and understanding of the field is often aready necessary. Articles like from Quanta Magazine dress the topics up in language that make them seem substantially simpler, and closer to human intuition, than they actually are.

[koolala]

Once we have open source AI training data and AI historians they could help make real science directly available instead of pop magazines.

[eigenket]

Quanta Magazine generally write very well written, well researched and pretty comprehensive articles. They cite their sources and they're very careful to get science as correct as they possibly can (I'm a scientist, and they once contacted me to fact-check one of their articles).

Comparing their work to the dross that AI produces is insulting

[koolala]

Insulting? Sorry! I didn't mean to say "pop mag" in a bad way like "ai" in a bad way.

I'm actually excited for computers getting big enough to comprehend human language and science.

I hope one day Dross becomes Dos! AI needs more XP. VR AI and VR AI Science edu is what I'm most hyped for.