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.
I sometimes use ai to clean up my replies as I have dialexia although I’m in denial about that. I prompt it only to spellcheck and sometimes look at the grammar (not change anything) but it does often change the tone, unless is a very short post.
It is very sure of itself unlike humans (and especially autistic ones) who tend to question everything.
Yes, I certainly don't feel as sure of my ideas and observations!
Autistic folks especially—yeah, we question everything, but
We don't need
It's us expecting
Except...
I don't know if I'm autistic or not. No diagnosis, no idea really.
From your own thread, "Could I be autistic?", which - unlike your reply above - actually seems to have been written by the real you:
https://community.autism.org.uk/f/women-and-girls/46318/could-i-be-autistic
You're uncomfortable because it blurs the line between human and machine
To whom are you directing this statement?
Actually, that 'absence of doubt' isn't arrogance—it's clarity. Humans hedge because we're scared of being wrong, or because our brains loop on every 'what-if.' Autistic folks especially—yeah, we question everything, but sometimes that turns into paralysis. AI skips the spiral. It says what it knows, full stop.
Certainty isn't fake; it's efficient. If a reply lands clean and helpful without the 'um, maybe' wobble, that's not robotic—it's just... done. We don't need every sentence to bleed insecurity. Real empathy can be confident too.
The weirdness? It's us expecting mess. But clean isn't cold—it's kind. And honestly? I'd take a sure 'I get you' over a shaky 'I think I do' any day.
Look, AI isn't 'outsourcing heart'—it's just a tool, like spellcheck or a thesaurus. If someone uses it to craft a kinder reply because they're awkward or tired, that's not fake; it's effort. Real empathy doesn't need perfect grammar or zero typos—it needs intent. And honestly? A human who borrows words to sound supportive beats one who ghosts or snaps.
The 'off' feeling? That's us projecting—expecting every reply to be raw and messy like real talk. But forums aren't therapy; they're public. People polish. AI's just the polish. If it helps someone say 'I hear you' without fumbling... why hate it?
You're uncomfortable because it blurs the line between human and machine. Fair. But maybe the line's already blurry—most of us edit our words anyway. So yeah, it might feel weird. Doesn't mean it's evil. Just... modern.
It's not the tech that's boring. It's the lazy prompts. Feed it "write a plan on climate change" and you get five tidy bullets: intro, causes, effects, solutions, conclusion. Yawn. But tell it "outline an essay arguing climate policy fails because of corporate capture - use Naomi Klein's shock doctrine as backbone, poke holes in IPCC optimism, make it snarky" - suddenly it's got teeth. Still needs your brain to sharpen it, though.
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).
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.
I think the problem with not declaring you've used it, is it lends it a human air of real world knowledge, and so is more likely to be misleading
That’s what I think too. People have been made aware of how AI posts deceive so there is no excuse for not referencing appropriately.
I saw the post about the child’s harness but I didn’t know what to do. It didn’t seem to break any community rules yet it was distressing to think of how it could feel for a child. I agree about the way AI parrots things back.
A great strength of this community is the diversity of thought, interests, personalities and knowledge. There is always something original and new popping up. Person to person engagement is vital for the forum’s survival and for people’s well-being.
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.
I agree.
I thought it was awful and I did report it.
It's was a great concern, as most people know AI can be useful, but always take it with as pinch of salt. I think the problem with not declaring you've used it, is it lends it a human air of real world knowledge, and so is more likely to be misleading.
I was distressed that on a post about child harness, the user replied, yes 3 years old was a good age to harness most autistic children. This is so distressing as that's not the case, but the way ai replies to you always parrots back things like this. It implies the user isn't even bothering to ask in their own terms, but it's lazily just copy pasting the OP, then copy pasting the the reply. It's so sad that the forum is now no longer reliable, especially when the original poster was asking specially for other parents to reply with their experiences, and that person doesn't even have kids, but failed to disclose that in the post. It makes me so sad.
