Only when the fraudsters have triumphed completely and have no remaining fear of punishment will they openly defend the fraud without any reference to the organization’s ostensible purpose.
[…] Recently Arxiv announced a policy of banning authors for one year if they submit papers containing “incontrovertible evidence that the authors did not check the results of LLM generation”, including “hallucinated references”. Lots of academics attacked the policy. […] More interestingly, though, many attacked the policy on the basis that it will hurt the careers of the many academics who routinely cite references without reading them, that “it’s very common for professors just to copy citations they found in other papers and put them into their own papers because they need a lot of citations to look credible” and therefore fake LLM citations should not be punished.
I couldn’t find more examples of academics attacking the policy in this way other than the tweet that was linked to. I’m not sure whether that would undermine the idea that the fraudsters have “triumphed completely”. I guess even if they aren’t too afraid to openly defend the fraud they still wouldn’t want to bring attention to it by writing blog posts attacking the policy.
Based on stuff shared in this topic and for example The Academic Culture of Fraud (discussed earlier here), I believe the parasite-fraudster-academics have essentially “triumphed completely”.