Christopher Newfield

Reviewing yet another academic paper full of hallucinated references, odd citation practices, and improperly attributed material. To all academic colleagues out there, literally ruining our profession: thanks for nothing.

I've been seeing this more and more, labs are shrinking due to massive funding cuts and scientists are leaning more and more on AI. There used to be a lot of debate about whether or not academia was a pyramid scheme, but I think that will quickly be obsolete if labs start using AI rather than training new students. "The issue is not whether my students are valuable. In the long run, they are invaluable. The issue is that their value emerges slowly, whereas AI delivers immediate returns. I feel somewhat embarrassed to admit how tempting this is. In our culture, preferring an algorithm to a trainee feels like a betrayal of the academic mission. Yet I see these calculations shaping the labs around me. Close colleagues are quietly refraining from taking on as many students as they used to. When they do take students, they are noticeably pickier." science.org/content/articl…

96 years is how long it took me to read the theory of communicative action

Gaffe-prone Kemi Badenoch denies calling for the UK to join Donald Trump’s war on Iran. This is a bizarre denial, as I was about 20ft away from her last week when she did exactly that. theguardian.com/politics/2026/…

Populations the size of entire American cities are being displaced by Israel in a single day, and yet much of our media and political class continues to back Israel and pretend what it's doing in the Middle East is somehow normal or defensible or not an epic war crime.

"Why This Time is Different Rapidan Energy Group's proprietary historical disruption dataset – covering every major supply event since 1950 – confirms that Gulf War III has exceeded any prior disruption by more than 2x" Great&quick analysis @Bob_McNally prnewswire.com/news-releases/…

I just gave a closed-book, pen-and-paper midterm exam in my 300-level course at UBC with 100 students. All exams were graded by an experienced graduate-level TA according to a rubric. *** The average was 64/100.*** My class averages at UBC are usually 80-85. Context: • This was the first midterm, covering ONLY 4 weeks of material. • Students had a list of possible questions in advance: no surprise questions. • Questions included (a) 3 concept definitions, (b) 3 paragraph-long questions, and (c) a 1.5-page essay. • I have taught this class multiple times. Nothing in my teaching style changed this semester. • We read entire paragraphs of text in class, so students don't have to do something on their own that wasn't covered during the lecture. • Students take a 10-question multiple-choice quiz at the end of every class (30% of the final grade). • Attendance is 95-99% every class. Attention during lectures and participation in pair-work activities are very high → anticipating the end-of-class quiz. *** But unfortunately, I suspect many students are not reading the material on the syllabus. They are asking LLMs to summarize it instead.*** After the midterm, students reported: • They thought they knew concept definitions but couldn't produce them on paper. • They thought they understood the arguments but struggled to connect them or identify points of agreement and disagreement. My view: It might be “cool” or “innovative” to teach students to summarize readings with ChatGPT or write essays with Claude. But we may be doing them a disservice: reducing their ability to retain material, think creatively, and reason from what they know. If you only read what AI has summarized for you, you don’t truly "know" the material. Moving forward: We have a second midterm coming up. I don't know how to convey to students that the best way to do better on the exam is to rely on and improve their own reading skills.

The Lancet recently published a study which found that sanctions from the US have caused 38 million deaths since 1970. The average death toll ranges from 400,000 to over 1 million per year.

“All that is to say, there’s a strong consensus that outsourcing your thinking to AI atrophies your brain. The executives who evangelized the lobotomy machine, it seems, are no exception to the rule.” Indeed…they may be the very definition of the rule.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: it really is enraging that university libraries have stopped buying physical copies of books.

This is how the New York Times describes bombing seven countries and carrying out a genocide.

I dislike Starmer intensely, but he is here entirely correct, and the British Right, particularly Reform, almost entirely, catastrophically wrong

Maybe I’m becoming desensitised but this hasn’t hit me as much as the photos of malnourished babies in Gaza did.

Massie: Iran is not Venezuela. The Ayatollah was not a president. He was a religious leader… The United States and Israel turned him into a martyr. And in the process of doing so, we've already expended billions of dollars and… solemnly, six American families must now lay to rest their sons and daughters. And for what? This administration can't even give us a straight answer as to why we launched this preemptive war.

Germany’s incoming chief economic adviser isn’t concerned about the war in Iran. He’s modelling it. Short-term pain, long-term “real opportunity” — for German exports. Millions of lives are at risk and the growth forecasts are already in. Thank you Germany. welt.de/wirtschaft/art…

The Prime Minister should follow in the footsteps of Spain and say: no way, absolutely not, we will not be involved in this illegal war in any way whatsoever.

Today we will see Trump explode! Spanish Prime Minister Sánchez has openly confronted Trump after the latter announced yesterday that he would sever trade relations with Spain. In his speech, he criticized Trump for his decision to start a war, emphasizing that his country does not support it and, above all, adheres to the principles of international law. He also pointed out that 23 years ago, there was already a major war in the Middle East in Iraq, which had devastating consequences, including increased migration and a rise in international Islamic terrorism. "Spain opposes this catastrophe. Because we understand that governments are there to improve people's lives, to solve problems, not to worsen them. And it is absolutely unacceptable that leaders who are incapable of fulfilling this task use the smokescreen of war to mask their incompetence and line the pockets of a select few." Sánchez concluded his speech by declaring that his country would not be complicit in anything that contradicts its values ​​simply because of "fear of reprisals from some individuals," and that he had confidence in "Spain's economic, institutional, and moral strength."

When the Secretary of War made these comments, about one in five people killed by Operation Epic Fury were elementary-age schoolgirls in the middle of a normal school day.

This. A thousand time this. I have worked in the EU institutions for nearly two decades, but never before have I seen the EU’s political elite seem so lost, behave in such irrational ways, and assume such suicidal strategic positions. Europe is stuck between a rock and a hard place, and is smashing itself in the head with an iron bar in its attempt to escape.

“Iran chooses chaos.” That’s the headline of today's newsletter from The New York Times. This is not the headline of a serious, fact-based newspaper. It’s the headline of a newspaper that promotes US war propaganda. I’m one of those who still subscribes, although I'm increasingly asking myself why. I’m reaching the end of my tether with the New York Times.