| A bit of a tangent but I've read this phrase almost verbatim in another article[1] today: > "This study is really good," says Sunghwan Jung, a biophysicist at Cornell University who studies the mechanics of animal movements and was not involved with the research. It shows, he says, that the guts of these animals "are very special." The other article [1] quote: > It’s “an impressive step,” said Jack Szostak (opens a new tab), who studies the origins of life at the University of Chicago and was not involved in the research. “I don’t know of any other effort to put together an artificial cell from biological components that has progressed so far.” Are these editorial guidelines to get an independent read? Just coincidence? I don't think they are LLM bits because I expect better from these magazines, but it's too eerily similar. [1] https://www.quantamagazine.org/for-the-first-time-a-cell-bui... |
"Hi, Jack, came across this thing where they claim to have created artificial life. Is it real?"
"It's an impressive step..."
"Hey, Jack, there's this new thing called LK-99 that everyone is excited about. Why?"
"It's not real"
Some amount of `site:www.quantamagazine.org "Jack Szostak"` querying on Google seems to indicate this might be the case. Though I have to say it's probably not everyone who has a Nobel laureate on their rolodex for a quick "hi, is this real?"