Nature

The retracted works date to the 1940s, when republishing a paper across journals was ordinary practice. One “duplicate” simply shared a title with the paper it was answering. A bot most likely flagged both, and a human approved it.

The detail the thread couldn't get over: the publisher won't explain, saying retraction details “can only be shared with the relevant authors.” Planck died in 1947.

Microsoft's code computed bias-axis symmetry with x[::-1], reversing array positions rather than the actual measured values. A separate filter, zbp_cluster_numbers=[1], plotted only the largest region; setting it to [1,2] surfaced data the paper omitted.

Legg's critique was accepted by Nature on April 20, 2026. Microsoft's Chetan Nayak calls the issues minor; the thread surfaced a 2016 Nature retraction caused by an equally small sign error.

A Nature piece on early skill-atrophy research surfaced a randomized controlled trial run by Anthropic itself: people who leaned on the assistant retained far less of what they'd just done.

The sharpest line in the thread came from a FAANG engineer watching it happen up close: the two colleagues who vibe-code the most have 'lost literally all of their skills' and their judgment with them. A counter-voice argues the real loop is nastier than atrophy: using the tool well requires the very skill the tool erodes.