> every faculty member knows that once their work is targeted by AI, they will be outed. No body of written work in academia can survive the power of AI searching for missing quotation marks, failures to paraphrase appropriately, and/or the failure to properly credit the work of others.

Citation? The most cutting-edge AI still has an enormous margin of error, entirely unsuitable for accusing people of "plagiarism" without additional evidence.

I can imagine a researcher thinking "I should cite this in my paper. I'll cut-and-paste the text into my notes." But then later they don't recognize in their notes which text is theirs and which was cut-and-pasted. That's still "plagiarism" -- but there are cases where it can be 100% unintentional.

This is all kind of beside the point, though. How you feel about this pretty much comes down to whether you support or don't support Ackman's crusade against university presidents over things that are entirely unrelated to plagiarism.

The entitlement is off the charts with this one.

"off-topic: Most stories about politics"

This is a continuation of Bill's campaign: https://twitter.com/BillAckman/status/1742441534627184760

Reminds me of a couple of other notorious political comments by VCs recently.

Damn Bill, no one has the time to read a 20,000 word tweet