• Replies 209 replies
  • Subscribers 47 subscribers
  • Views 9638 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

AI replies

Orangegnome

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. 

Parents

  • Having read another discussion on this forum about the use of AI to respond I've come to a couple of conclusions. 

    1. It's not ok if the post you submit is not your ideas and if it's some AI wording ok but I hate it all being AI wording.

    AI 'slop' can enter what you say but it's said in a confident way by the AI.

    2.  AI replies make me feel duped if I eventually realise they aren't human.

    As I talked about in this thread a member of my family only corresponds with me via AI and I find it bizarre and deeply unnerving especially in light of his history of psychosis and being sectioned.

    We are human and I hope that the vast majority of us want to be confident that we are talking to other humans directly. 

  • in reply to B
    B said:
    AI replies make me feel duped if I eventually realise they aren't human

    Yes! Duped is the word to describe how I felt. 

    I can only imagine how it must feel to have a family member correspondent in such a way. I wouldn’t have confidence over their intentions in the moment and that is how I feel about all AI posts.

  • in reply to ArchaeC
    ArchaeC said:
    that is how I feel about all AI posts.

    I loathe recreational AI (LLM stuff/images) with a passion partly generated by environmental concerns and partly the way it bolsters the wealth of amoral tech billionaires. For those reasons, I sold all my stock in a tech fund and have never touched AI voluntarily. However, the dicussion about it on this forum makes me uncomfortably aware that I wouldn't know how to tell the difference between AI slop and something genuinely written by some humans.

  • in reply to ArchaeC
    ArchaeC said:
    A narrative from a real person allows their character to show through. AI can’t do that.

    Another good point that disturbs me when I read it.

  • in reply to Alexa

    I have to say that, yes, AI can’t always be relied on and often takes things out of context. However, despite those reservations, I’ve found that when chatting with my particular AI model (Copilot), it’s incredibly insightful and helpful about autistic behavior, and very comforting when it simply tries to clarify why I’ve had these problems. It also seems to remember things, as it sometimes refers back to past discussions that relate to the current point under discussion. So, I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss AI too readily, as it definitely has its value - you just have to use it with due caution.

  • in reply to Alexa

    Selling tech stock was a wise move for the reasons you state. Regarding the dip in price, I think it will likely rebound as they will need to fund their ‘improvements’, but of course, nothing is certain in the stock market. Perhaps AI’s environmental impact will gain prominence now that concerns over AI’s potential for harm is gaining traction. I do hope so.

    Alexa said:
    I wouldn't know how to tell the difference between AI slop and something genuinely written by some humans.

    There’s no denying that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference. I’ve learned to get a feel for the difference, but I’m not confident in relying on it without putting through an AI detector. Some AI narratives can feel patronising when they give positive feedback, in a way that genuine feedback doesn’t. There’s a flatness in tone and it summarises things too neatly. A narrative from a real person allows their character to show through. AI can’t do that.

Reply
  • in reply to Alexa

    Selling tech stock was a wise move for the reasons you state. Regarding the dip in price, I think it will likely rebound as they will need to fund their ‘improvements’, but of course, nothing is certain in the stock market. Perhaps AI’s environmental impact will gain prominence now that concerns over AI’s potential for harm is gaining traction. I do hope so.

    Alexa said:
    I wouldn't know how to tell the difference between AI slop and something genuinely written by some humans.

    There’s no denying that it’s becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference. I’ve learned to get a feel for the difference, but I’m not confident in relying on it without putting through an AI detector. Some AI narratives can feel patronising when they give positive feedback, in a way that genuine feedback doesn’t. There’s a flatness in tone and it summarises things too neatly. A narrative from a real person allows their character to show through. AI can’t do that.

Children