> scholarly dark matter that exists to pad CVs and satisfy bureaucratic metrics, but which no one actually reads or relies upon.

Is it cynical to believe this is already true and has been forever?

Is it naive to hope that when AI can do this work, we will all admit that much of the work was never worth doing in the first place, our academic institutions are broken, and new incentives are sorely needed?

I’m reminded of a chapter in Abundance where Ezra Klein notes how successful (NIH?) grant awardees are getting older over time, nobody will take risks on young scientists, and everyone is spending more of their time churning out bureaucratic compliance than doing science.