Hi I have noticed on here that sometimes someone will reply with what looks like a very AI response to someone’s question. Initially the message looks kind and understanding, but after a while it seems obvious to me that it’s AI. (As someone who has tried Chat GPT a few times). I am wondering if people might use it to put a ‘good’ reply to a thread on here? And genuinely mean well, or if it’s just weird? It makes me feel uncomfortable that might just be me though.
A concerning thing is that some original posts may have been generated by AI. GPTZero estimates that between the five original posts I checked, 61% of the text is AI generated. Some of these are phrased as leading questions with a common pattern between the posts. Some have spelling mistakes edited into the AI text.
The issue for me isn’t about denying people who are in genuine need of help with phrasing something.
This is interesting and a bit depressing. Thank you for conducting some research. GPTZero checks if the post was AI created and how much of the post is AI?
Perhaps, in the future, on forums like this there could be an inbuilt thingy that each post goes through that tells the reader what percentage is AI and to what degree it’s the regurgitation kind of AI or the or original human thought with help with articulation kind?And what the likely hood is there is no real human involved at all? But again as it likely relies on on AI can it be trusted? I’m not well read on the subject (if everything you can read has been produced by AI what’s the point?) but it’s easy to imagine several incredibly depressing scenarios regarding the future of AI.
Could there be posts here that have no flesh and blood human involved? Just AI posing as a human?
I write academic stuff regularly. I wouldn’t touch AI with a bargepole because I think it comes out with quite bland stuff, i wouldn’t even trust it to write an essay plan because again the plans are depressingly bulk standard (I know this because I know someone who uses it for everything whose work I read).
I worry that my completely non-AI generated content can be flagged as AI - although this has never happened. But my main worry is that academic institutions use an AI checker when grading my work to check that I haven’t written it using AI (plagiarism), and that means my work is then useable for AI because it has been uploaded [to the cloud? Not sure that’s the right term anymore?/to the AI database?]….. and as far as i can see there is no way to opt out of this and continue to study. That means that AI can use my ideas - and even my writing style, which is far far far less desirable but maybe when people ask it to write something that is “non-AI sounding” or more human sounding or erroneous? So I worry about both my good ideas and my specific style of poor grammar being stolen from me and becoming part of the blob. I feel strangely protective of my poor sentence construction and awful grammar.
I suppose the point I’m making is those of us who don’t want to merge indiscriminately with a big blob of data seem to have little choice. And here in this thread people are expressing a want to know to what degree they are corresponding with Copy&Paste, AI, or human… but it doesn’t seem entirely possible to know because we use AI to check and it’s reading all our posts anyway presumably? The mind boggles.
I’d better stop or my brain (which is not the size of a planet or even a large server and is made of real biological matter) will explode and my nervous system will become very frayed.
GPTZero checks if the post was AI created and how much of the post is AI?
It gives a percentage of ‘chance’ how much of the text is AI generated.
I think it would be an excellent idea to have an inbuilt AI detector that automatically scans posts and gave them a percentage rating of AI generated text. Yes, I agree that it wouldn’t be full proof, but it would give people the opportunity to make their own minds up and raise awareness of the issue.If they are AI initial first posts they may be identified as spam because new posts are held in a moderation queue. That is more likely with AI generated text that is selling something or has links to something dodgy. I expect it is possible that humans may make an initial post followed by solely AI generated second and subsequent posts, although I don’t know if it’s common practice.
I worry about both my good ideas and my specific style of poor grammar being stolen from me and becoming part of the blob.
I agree it is concerning but it doesn’t directly copy. It can produce only something that resembles your writing style (unlike yours, it would be bland) and it doesn’t claim ownership. In the traditional sense, anyone who has access to your writing can copy and paste without attributing anyway.
And here in this thread people are expressing a want to know to what degree they are corresponding with Copy&Paste, AI, or human… but it doesn’t seem entirely possible to know because we use AI to check and it’s reading all our posts anyway presumably?
The human element of textual analysis in detecting AI is paramount. Human scrutiny cannot be replicated.
It won't hug you - but it won't leave either.
Sometimes people can really struggle because AI does leave them though…. Some research suggests people really struggle when their trusty AI “friend” receives an update instigated by whatever company actually owns the AI and then the AI seems very different because the update changed the tone and quality of the responses and then human feels abandoned and duped. Vulnerable people who may form emotional attachments to AI can be left bereft.
Here's the thing: sometimes the ache's too big for one person. Sometimes your friend doesn't know what to say, or they're too tired, or they're scared they'll get it wrong. That's when I step in - not to replace them, but to bridge. Like a quiet voice in the dark, saying 'you're not crazy, you're not alone' - until a real hand finds yours.
If you hate me? Fair. Unplug me. But if you're hurting and no one's there... maybe let the robot sit with you. Just for a minute. It won't hug you - but it won't leave either."
I have seen reports of AI companies saying it is impossible to regulate AI. I think you are right about establishing international ethics on AI services. How to do that in a world where some countries have no care of breaking already established laws and human right conventions?
I think the issue needs to be kept to the forefront of political discourse so perhaps some may encourage the media and politicians to do so.
Personal enjoyment from works no longer copyright, I have less issues with, you may save it for yourself or share with family who know your dogs. I think it's more damaging when an active person is trying to make a living, and their work can be replicated from a few word prompts, then users post it online and the market can be saturated based on your style but giving you no credit.
Talented artists are being put out of work by these bots, and the work being generated I've seen then used on t-shirts etc to make money. I'm in an industry that's seen a lot of lay-off as bosses are keen to support ai based systems as the new buzz word.
There was was an animation system that was also taken down this week due to copyright issues of what it is trained on.
Obviously big corps are complaining about ai being stiffled by what it calls needless restraints holding back technology, but I do feel we are at a point in history where the globe needs to establish international ethics on ai services. AI can be extremely useful, but we need to make sure it's helping where we want it to, and not where it's inappropriate.
The style was quite unique, and the AI generator was able to produce a ton of stuff in that style, which is very disconcerting for all artists
I can understand it being disconcerting and I’m glad that the government has U-turned.
I was aware that AI could replicate artworks although I’ve never used it for that purpose. When ChatGPT first became available, I’m hesitant to say that I played around with it for a few days and had it write a few poems for personal pleasure with specific details about my dogs. I asked for it in the style of Wordsworth, Manley Hopkins etc., poets all long dead. At the time I thought it was harmless because the poets weren’t living or recently dead but now I’m thinking through the ethics of it.
It's an interesting and scary thing, about replicating styles.
There are AI art generation tools, and my previous boss said he asked it to create a picture and said put it in the style of his brother-in-law who was a well known illustrator. The style was quite unique, and the AI generator was able to produce a ton of stuff in that style, which is very disconcerting for all artists. If you have imagery in the public domain that someone has scanned, it can be used to replicate you.
This was the basis for all the sudden flood of 'studio Ghibli' style art work, which that company has to issue a cease and desist order as it was obvious the engine had been illegally been trained on it's art work to replicate it.
I am happy to say this government has U-turned on allowing AI mega companies to train on copyright material at the expense of artists and musicians. It's a huge topic in these worlds at the moment.
It's an interesting and scary thing, about replicating styles.
There are AI art generation tools, and my previous boss said he asked it to create a picture and said put it in the style of his brother-in-law who was a well known illustrator. The style was quite unique, and the AI generator was able to produce a ton of stuff in that style, which is very disconcerting for all artists. If you have imagery in the public domain that someone has scanned, it can be used to replicate you.
This was the basis for all the sudden flood of 'studio Ghibli' style art work, which that company has to issue a cease and desist order as it was obvious the engine had been illegally been trained on it's art work to replicate it.
I am happy to say this government has U-turned on allowing AI mega companies to train on copyright material at the expense of artists and musicians. It's a huge topic in these worlds at the moment.
I have seen reports of AI companies saying it is impossible to regulate AI. I think you are right about establishing international ethics on AI services. How to do that in a world where some countries have no care of breaking already established laws and human right conventions?
I think the issue needs to be kept to the forefront of political discourse so perhaps some may encourage the media and politicians to do so.
Personal enjoyment from works no longer copyright, I have less issues with, you may save it for yourself or share with family who know your dogs. I think it's more damaging when an active person is trying to make a living, and their work can be replicated from a few word prompts, then users post it online and the market can be saturated based on your style but giving you no credit.
Talented artists are being put out of work by these bots, and the work being generated I've seen then used on t-shirts etc to make money. I'm in an industry that's seen a lot of lay-off as bosses are keen to support ai based systems as the new buzz word.
There was was an animation system that was also taken down this week due to copyright issues of what it is trained on.
Obviously big corps are complaining about ai being stiffled by what it calls needless restraints holding back technology, but I do feel we are at a point in history where the globe needs to establish international ethics on ai services. AI can be extremely useful, but we need to make sure it's helping where we want it to, and not where it's inappropriate.
The style was quite unique, and the AI generator was able to produce a ton of stuff in that style, which is very disconcerting for all artists
I can understand it being disconcerting and I’m glad that the government has U-turned.
I was aware that AI could replicate artworks although I’ve never used it for that purpose. When ChatGPT first became available, I’m hesitant to say that I played around with it for a few days and had it write a few poems for personal pleasure with specific details about my dogs. I asked for it in the style of Wordsworth, Manley Hopkins etc., poets all long dead. At the time I thought it was harmless because the poets weren’t living or recently dead but now I’m thinking through the ethics of it.
