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.
One of the aspects of lostmyway 's AI generated responses that I note is the absence of human doubt.
It is very sure of itself unlike humans (and especially autistic ones) who tend to question everything.
All the pithy statements are written with great certainty.
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.
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.
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.
Good fun thank you. I didn’t get them all correct but I’m putting it down to the human content.
A rather spiffing 12/12 
Thanks for sharing this topical content/preparation!
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.
Yes, I pointed out Rule 7.
I think you just have to deal with it.
I’m dealing with it very well thank you. I have been using AI for some time and I find it very useful, but I don’t use it on this forum.
It's the value of what is communicated that is important.
I agree it’s the value of what is communicated that is important.
I value posts that are written by humans because their essence shines through. Each person has a unique writing style that enables their soul, personality and character to reveal itself. I have come to know and love the quirkiness of individuals, so the people behind the posts are of intrinsic value and their original thoughts allow me to get a sense of them.
AI posts are devoid of personality and character. They have no soul and are tedious and extremely boring.
Is any information ever 100% accurate?
Of course there is accurate information here. There is sometimes information that isn’t accurate. It doesn’t change how I feel about engaging with AI posts on this forum.
Oh I see, or not as it were, what a shame that people feel the need to resort to rudeness when challenged, that always make me think that they don't really have a worthwhile arguement to put forward and it invalidates anything they do say.
I notice you didn't really engage with my question, just gave me a list of possible resourses, which is kind of you, but isn't really answering my point.
He did reply but rudely and his post was deleted.
I've just had a look at your links and they're not specific enough for my needs, I'm looking for less general information, I have a degree in medieval history, and specilise in The Anglo-Saxon Conversion period, none of the sources you gave seem to cover my interests in enough depth. This is a common problem for those us who want post degree level research.
I notice you didn't really engage with my question, just gave me a list of possible resourses, which is kind of you, but isn't really answering my point.
yes AI is becoming a big part of our communication.
It's in built to many email programs like outlook these days
I think it can be used to sometime help you better construct what you mean - maybe improve the wording - or change the tone.
I use AI everyday at work - but I'd never cut and paste from it. It gets many things wrong but its learning and am sure over a short time, will get less and less incorrect.
TBH things like ChatGPT can often seem like you are having a person to person communication - but you have to remember its not. I even heard of AI friend the other day - which on one hand sounds scary but i understand why it may work for some
Your question, also leads me to think..How hard would it be for us to determine if a reply is AI generated or human ?, I'm not certain I could spot them
Thank you, Dormouse, for an open letter which is so thoughtful, compassionate and beautifully expressed.
Well, you're just gaslighting now, aren't you? You're trying to twist reality to fit your own perspective. I have every right to use reasonable language to make my case, and if you choose to shift the goalposts, that’s not my fault.
Taking a [removed by mod] stance on this probably won’t help much
You've been warned about language use before. Don't attack everyone. Be respectful and don't take discussion of ai as personal attack. If you feel it's personal, you often need to take some time out and then reflect if it was personal or about the actual use of ai and simply about sign posting when you use it.
I like biscuits, but if someone shoved one in my face I would get annoyed. If someone offered me one, I'd be thankful.
From what I’ve observed, Rule 7 seems to depend on who is considered to be the one doing the abusing. Unfortunately, double standards appear to apply on this forum.
If someone chooses to be offended, that’s their problem, not mine. If someone is behaving in an unreasonable way, why shouldn’t they be made aware of it? The term 'Luddite' is a perfectly legitimate way of describing someone who stubbornly refuses to accept the modern world. If you're going to invoke the woke card every time you don't like what I say, there's no point in saying anything!
