Bitcoin Forum

I feel like we need clear rules about Artificial Intelligence on the forum.

What does the forum staff think about AI-generated posts?
Should we report those posts to moderators?
Should AI text be quoted?
Should users make the AI-Busters (Just like we have the Spam-Busters)?
Can users get nuked if they only post AI-generated content?

I know there are some other topics related to AI like this one https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5445074.60 but i don't see any intervention from the staff on that thread, that's why i place this questions to know how should we proceed about this topic as users.

it's crazy how many posts here are made with chatgpt. most of those posts are absurd, make zero sense

My thoughts on this are simple. If a user is assisted in making a post through artificial intelligence, instead of the user to pass it on as knowledge coming from themselves they should do the right thing and simply put at the footnote or references, source as artificial intelligence. Doing this without adding a source is tantamount to plagiarism. However if it is overdone by a user then the attention of the user needs to be called to it and they should be cautioned. We want to see original thoughts, ideas and write up not ai generated.

Take a look with this one.


Yes AI Spam Report Reference Thread (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.0)

Yes, and better to write if the text was created by AI.

Do you mean a gang? users who caught AI posters seems fall to Spam-busters too.

I don't really know about it, but if someone can caught the AI generated content plagiarized other contents, it would fall to plagiarism and the users can be nuked or banned.

Is grammarly and other tools to improve post quality is part of this AI tools? I’m using this AI tools sometimes when I’m on a device with this extension which I use to correct my grammar and improve my post. Sometimes it change my sentence construction to a more decent format.

I’m confused whether this tool is considered as AI or not but I'm sure that it’s different approach compared to chatgpt AI because my thoughts is the basis of the improved post.

I do not know how to answer this question but I would say after you have used grammarly to help your sentence construction, run your text through a AI checker software available on the internet, if they turn out to signal that it is AI written, I would advise that you should simply indicate at the end of the text that grammarly was used in helping your sentence construction. Because if any other user runs your texts via the AI checker and it turns out to be 100% AI, how do you explain to them that it was grammarly that you use for sentence construction and not chat GPT?

AI will make spamming much easier because users that will try to spam the forum can just make multiple accounts and then use AI to create topics and posts that clearly doesn't have any thought in it or organic idea in there which makes it easier to reproduce with just a simple prompt, they'd probably be able to do it. So rather than dealing with that possibility because they want to serve people equally and give them the freedom that they want to have, outright prohibition is the route that they've chosen which is understandable because that's the way that would be better for more people, the quality of the posts aren't even going to be affected or would be damaged because there's a restriction on AI generated posts.

The other thing that makes AI bad for this forum is that it would be an unfair advantage to those that knows how to post without the assistance of an AI.

I think I have made a couple of reports and nothing has been done. To me, AI generated posts should be treated just like plagiarism.

There is even a thread dedicated to reporting the AI spammers. The problem is, mods don't act on the reports there by discouraging the reporters a little.

Quoting should be fine if the source is cited


Here we go --- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.0

When those rules were made, AI has not been as popular as it is right now, and this is even the first time I've come across this comment or rule by one of the forum administrators.
 
With the rate at which AI is being used to generate a post, it shouldn't be treated differently from plagiarism. Plagiarism is when someone presents content that belongs to someone else as their own, claiming the whole idea and the rest of it. We all consider that to be plagiarism.
 
AI-generated posts also fall under that category because they are content written by none other than humans, and if such content should be posted or shared, honour should be given to the original source where the information was gotten from.

i'm pretty sure you used either chatgpt or google translate to write that post, correct?

The first thing we should stop calling it Artificial Intelligence and more like Artificial Shitposting, cause in most of those cases there is nothing intelligent in it, just the same shitpost you would get for plagiarizing an article or using a word spinner on the previous right answer.
In my opinion, anyone caught doing such a thing should get a 7 days ban and then a full ban if caught doing it again, this is to give him time to defend himself in case of a mistake in detection, but overall we should discourage this as much as possible, it's bad for the forum it's bad for discussions, there is simply no positive thing coming out of allowing it.

you're gonna have to ban a looot of people

Nope.

Why should I?

I understand that even if a post is well formatted and grammatically too correct as in the case of chatgpt, but if it doesn't fit in a place it is used, it should be called a spam. This is a discussion forum, and most of the discussions here are emotionally attached and in most cases these AI generated texts eliminate the emotions.

It is time for theymos to do something. I believe he is reluctant to do so because he believes there's no 100% sure tool for detecting AI. You can be wrongly accused and banned. So, as time unfolds there'll clear rules about AI posting. I actually do not here to be filled with randomly generated texts in the future.

Maybe we should ask the expert   ;D

Should a bitcoin forum allow AI posting?


ChatGPT

Allowing AI posting on a Bitcoin forum can have both benefits and drawbacks. Here are some considerations:

Benefits:

    24/7 Availability: AI can provide responses and engage in discussions at any time, ensuring continuous activity on the forum.
    Instantaneous Responses: AI can quickly answer common questions or provide information without the need for human intervention, improving user experience.
    Scalability: AI can handle a large volume of inquiries simultaneously, allowing the forum to scale efficiently as the user base grows.
    Diverse Perspectives: AI can offer different perspectives and insights based on the data it's trained on, enriching discussions.

Drawbacks:

    Quality Control: AI may produce low-quality or irrelevant responses, leading to misinformation or confusion among users.
    Lack of Emotional Intelligence: AI may struggle to understand the nuances of human communication, leading to misunderstandings or inappropriate responses.
    Ethical Concerns: AI posting raises ethical questions regarding transparency, accountability, and potential manipulation of discussions.
    Security Risks: AI could be exploited by malicious actors to spread misinformation, promote scams, or engage in other nefarious activities.

Ultimately, the decision to allow AI posting on a Bitcoin forum should consider these factors, as well as the specific goals and values of the community. Implementing proper safeguards, such as moderation and transparency measures, can help mitigate potential risks while harnessing the benefits of AI technology.

That "expert" is a bit biased, dont you think?

LMAO that really made me chuckle.

I'm not sure if we will be able to combat AI completely, and I also think it will be a part of our lives no matter if we want it or not.

Its really going to be difficult to weed out the users who use AI and the users who don't. I wish there was some way to trace it all the way back to the text like some sort of source code embedded into the text that would tell you who the verified maker of that text was. This would make your digital signature have a lot more weight in places like this, I can see some sort of digital signature standard becoming popular in the future to prove that AI was not used in the writing or something of that sort. For use in the forum is stickily banned and anyone who partakes in this type of behavior without properly sourcing will be shown very little grace, if any.

"AI" is plagiarism by definition. The only difference with "manuAl" (see what I did there?) plagiarism is that chatbots take many more inputs and uses bits and pieces of all of them. The only good thing is that if enough people spam using AI, it can't train itself anymore because it's input will be generated by AI already.

Anyone who often uses several tools to check AI texts can already visually predict whether a post was created using GPT chat or not. I'm not talking about guaranteed detection, but such posts most often attract the eye and beg for verification. If you're talking about grammar and spell-checking tools, then your text is unlikely to be detectable as AI-written text. I see a lot of examples, and those posts that people write on their own will never (or in rare cases) be identified as AI. Therefore, there is no need for clarification.

There is the topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.520), and there are quite a lot of examples of how people catch spammers in GPT chat. Moderators also use their own verification methods; otherwise, how can we think that some reports are good and some remain unprocessed?

But those cases when we mark spammers as “accounts using AI” have virtually no effect on the spammers. Having received the tag, they continue to write in AI texts.

It really is like fighting windmills.

Detecting AI is tricky unless there are obvious copy and paste. Write an article using AI, change words where necessary, add a few lines where necessary or even remove a few lines. It become impossible to detect that the source was AI but it still is AI. The only tool we have in detecting AI is to trust our feeling.

When I read posts, if I suspect a user then I start reading his post history, it takes time but after reading a few posts somehow you generate a feeling in yourself to make a decision. Problem with this method is, I can easily be wrong and a member become a victim of my wrong conclusion.

Well I guess they just living up to their names, they are intelligent not wise, they know what it means logically by the knowledge they were inputed or have access to but can't practically make use of it. Hence Artificial intelligence and not Artificial Wisdom.
So Artificial intelligence post can be classified as Shitposting.
I thought AI post face same penalty as plagiarism posts.
Personally can't tell what an AI post looks like but I have came across posts that just looks intelligently off
Like how did a human write something like this.
I usually just brush them as their writing style or their inexperience
I usually come across them on Newbies thread and feel they don't understand the forum well to add life to their posts.
I believe Quality beats Quantity most or all the time.
Funny how I  have never used ChatGpt in my life
Don't know if it's located in a platform or an App
Maybe that explains my inability of understanding AI posts.

Ordinarily, it's an act of cheating on others by using AI to generate a topic and laying claim of ownership to it. It could make those other members that are constantly driving in personal  effort into making quality posts get to feel as though their efforts is not making progress or improvement whenever they have to compare an AI generator poster posts to that of theirs which was done organically of their own effort. That's just one of many reasons I don't support the use of AI in the forum for discussions.

But if the administrators would want to absorb the use of AI in anyway, then I'll suggest a dedicated board is created for all kinds of AI generated topics no matter the category or section the topics should just be posted into that very board in as much as it's AI generated. And it won't need the poster to indicate if it's AI generated or not, just by having it there common sense will tell it's AI generated.

Thank you for this clarification. I usually have a doubt when using grammarly since they now offer text improvement which rephrased a complete statement based on the format your desire by changing the tone and expression of your original statement. This makes me confused because this might already a borderline AI like tools which I might unknowingly using.

But one thing is for sure that I construct first my first and just improve using the tools to make it more appealing to read by correcting the grammar. This comment give me confidence. Thanks again

i try to be as rude as possible in all my posts. no AI is rude so i'm sure no one will think i'm using it.

Most of the AI text generating tools I have tried can be "forced" (or rather persuaded) to use any expression style you want.  So, aiming for rudeness might not be the unique snowflake you think it is.  I think the content of your posts is much more important than the way you express it. Whether it is polite or rude makes no difference.

AI posts usually don't look genuine at all. If it is a long ass post and it is on a serious subject, written with a serious language, posted by a low ranking member; >90% that's a AI generated text. There are many posts like that nowadays and the posters are mostly newbies&jr members.

Sometimes I try some free AI tools on those texts and the AI tool says it is 100% written by a human and I can't believe it somewhat. I think they must have found a way to fool the AI detectors because I somehow don't think there are many genuine people out there who want to sign-up and write a long ass very detailed article on economics to educate us. Those must be spam.

That would never be too easy to trace. There are those who are actually excellent in their written communication skills that we tend to suspect that they are using AI, but in reality they simply use their intelligence and reasoning skills that not all of us are capable of having it. Or there are also those who are too good to be true but they end up copying it from AI to make their explanation more meaningful and convincing.

So I guess detecting AI carries a lot of work to do. You can’t simply just say that someone is using AI unless if you have proven proofs and evidences. Otherwise, you end up barking at the wrong tree.

oof i wasn't really expecting a reply but ok.
damn this place is so serious.
next time i'll add ten smileys to avoid confusion

The saying,

"Put your money where your mouth is!"

feels very relevant to this discussion.

Sorry can't post pics yet but: https://ibb.co/6B6Kg6y

<3

Except a user is using it as a reference to something, I don't think AI generated post should be used at all. I don't see any reason why somebody can use an AI to write a full post and then putting a link or stating that the post was AI generated makes it okay. I don't know if there's an expressive rule against it, but it doesn't make sense to me. It's different if you use an AI tool to correct your spelling, grammar or punctuation, but using an AI to generate a post is just wrong. It's not organic.
This is a discussion forum and in a discussion if you don't have anything to say you just be quiet and listen, you don't always have to say something. It's better to not reply to a post or create a post than posting someone else's words, that's plagiarism..

simple explanation. they use the AI in their native language and then use google translate. that leaves the AI like us: completely confused.
that's why most of those posts are long, make zero sense, have lots of grammar mistakes etc... they're unreadable, ridiculous and have become the standard of this place. and the mods dgaf.

Isn't this forum all about learning from each other? If people begin to use AI to create topics which are not readable and non-related, of what use is it to us who are eager to learn new ideas?

I might not know much about this forum, but I believe anyone who has the interest of this forum at heart will have fresh ideas in his/her head he or she would want everyone to benefit from.

Using AI to create posts means claiming ownership of ideas that are not originally yours. That is theft and should not be encouraged in this forum.

Reporting to the Moderator and getting the post tagged is the best option. I don't see any need were people begin to use AI generated views to post were we are suppose to generate ideas ourselves and share information.

I believe this will be look into because many are indulging in it, not only should we face spammers but also members involved in this act of plagiarism and fake post.

What you did is actually the correct way to use AI on the forum:

You announced that you were using AI, named the source, and then proceeded to post the material. Ideally, the ChatGPT (which I think is used by 95% of AI spammers on the forum) portion should also be in quotes, italics, or another color, but close enough.


Not true. The majority of posts I reported (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5456516.0) as "AI spam" have been deleted.


Or if you have nothing meaningful to say, perhaps just don't post at all...

You're right, this makes it faster to stop reading, and click Ignore on the user. I don't get the need so many people seem to feel to share whatever a computer spits out. If I wanted to know that, I'd ask that computer myself.

Honestly, I'll feel bad if I invest all my time reading a post (especially a lengthy one) from the beginning till the end and get to see a footnote telling me what I read was AI generated. If anyone is to use AI, it should be used as a research tool or a consultant, something that will be done with a search engine when AIs weren't rampant.

• Passing another person's knowledge as yours is deceitful and punishable. Also in the same vein;
• Generating emotionless texts in a middle of an ongoing real conversation is also deceitful and punishable.

Agree with this mate using an Artificial intelligence to make a post without giving some sources then it's look like a plagiarism. Cause the owner of that account using a tool to make a topic and it will never use his/her own knowledge to express what they want to express. But for me it's better to use our mind than using some tool to make our topic more professional. Cause it's a pleasure and honor to make a good work using our own knowledge than using something.

I think I have made a couple of reports and nothing has been done. To me, AI generated posts should be treated just like plagiarism.
[/quote]

I happen to agree, i.e., give those suckers a permaban that they'll never forget, except that using AI isn't the same as plagiarism and as far as I can tell still falls into a grey zone--at least for now.

There's no way any members ought to be able to use an AI program to crank out posts; that shit should be banned if caught.  I've played the scenario of shitposters using AI over in my head for a while now, and I can only come to one conclusion and that is the swift downfall of any real discussion here and maybe a slightly less swift swirling down the toilet bowl for bitcointalk as a forum.  Every shitposter and all of their alt accounts will be using it eventually if it isn't nipped in the bud.

Right now my big fear is detection capability and AI's ability to evade detection.  I'm guessing it's going to become harder to catch these idiots as time passes?  Or is it going to be something of a race?  My brain aches just thinking about the possibilities and knowing what lengths the dregs of bitcointalk will go to in order to participate in bounties/campaigns/what-have-you.

Really at first, in my thought AI is the same generated posts are the same with plagiarism because I look at it all the same content therefore the way the plagiarism action is taken should be the same with the AI posters because they are of the same category. But the AI detectors or the reporters of the AI posters only report those post to be deleted so many are still in the act.

Presently people use AI more than using google search engine because for them AI is faster. Like today I was making a research of a word. At first I checked AI, and I see the meaning and I checked google search engine again to know if there will be any different meaning but to my surprise they all have the same meaning. So the punishment should be the same.

It's good for us users to follow the rules of artificial intelligence on the forum, because what some people are commit in this forum is not proper, to be honest, and it's not that they don't know they only do it intentionally. After all the rules and regulations that have been given by the moderator of this forum, those who are thinking that they wisely decided they will still commit what is not supported, which is not sincerely advised for us users here.
 
I know that as human beings, we're individuals with differences, but at least we have to use our intelligence sometimes in whatever we apply or introduce ourselves to do to avoid falling victim to losing our energy. Because there are some users that are getting banned from this forum, the most common thing that causes it is that some have committed something like plagiarism or seen something from somewhere on the Internet and copied and pasted it, and that's what the moderator doesn't want any users to commit in this forum.

I'd argue chatbot verbal diarrhea is plagiarism by definition. I've already seen claims against those companies for using data as input without permission (which is a copyright issue). They reproduce bits and pieces of other data without sharing the original source (which is a plagiarism issue).

I don't call it "AI", because I don't see how this is "intelligence". It reminds me of fuzzy logic a bit. If it would be intelligence, those companies wouldn't need a human CEO ;)

I'm more along this line of thinking... AI spammers are taking a body of text they didn't write and copy/pasting it, presenting it in a manner that everyone is supposed to assume they wrote it. Its highly dishonest.


Apparently Google's new AI search summary feature is unable to tell the The Onion is satire and believes everyone on Reddit is always telling the truth.

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/05/27/LtEvg.png

As with the other chatbot models, this can create real problems, especially when it comes to presenting nuanced & complex information that others may rely on. That's why it should be banned altogether. I suggest the forum adopt the same AI policy (https://stackoverflow.com/help/gen-ai-policy) employed by Stack Overflow (which has been implemented for these very reasons):

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/05/27/LtIiI.png

Yes couldn't agree more they try to put into context from which they got out of context and pass it off as their own thought track. We should call this AI generation stealing "copypastism" or something of that nature because copy and pasting are all the end users do in this scenario hahhaaah actually the technical or well new technical term would be "promptographer" kind of like taking a picture but instead of the human using the camera to capture the picture humans only type on the keyboard and prompt the AI to create some sort of answer based on original thought. So that is interesting becuase now we are giving credit back to the humans as the original input for the work being done, so would this make us the sole owners of the output produced then? THat is a tough argument to uphold lol. I would say no, no it is not. And this rings true in the court of law today. Many a person has tried to claim AI as their own but it always comes back in the court room that any invention or work needs to be of human origin to be claimed as patentable original work.

It is even worse than usual human plagiarism since it is more likely using copy-paste from multiple websites and than it combines everything into one single post without providing any source links.
I wouldn't be surprised if developers made AI to replace some words to make it look different, and same tactics was used by human plagiators for years.

Well, both plagiarism and AI posts should be prohibited in the forum. Otherwise, everyone will get used to it and may think it’s acceptable inside and outside the forum. And while it’s becoming the trend these days most especially in social media, but here in the forum it could be never be a trend since we are trying to emphasize here our original points of views and insights based on how we understand things, and not based on simply copy pasting and claiming the author’s post as ours.

what exactly is going on here on this forum? are people getting paid bitcoins for making postings? if so one of the rules these campaign managers should have is "no ai" and if people get caught using it then the campaign manager should be punished by deleting their campaigns. you got to cut the problem off at the source.  :o

no person in their right mind would just go and ask chatgpt questions and copy and paste them into forum threads just for free. unless they had a serious mental problem.

It's the modern version of shitposting account farmers. Some even manage to earn Merit with it.

That's disgusting. Wtf?

And it's plagiarism because shitGPT just steals everything anyway like...come on -.-

Now A.I. is starting to steal video transcripts cuz it's running out of raw text on the internet to scrape:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csSNqaFMcdw

Again I ask...WTF is going on!? ???. How are people just okay with this?

And don't even get me started on GEMENI oh my gosh I could rant forever about how bad this is. In the hospital setting, doctors google EVERYTHING. It's fucking dangerous!

That's a way to try to solve the problem, but is not only about the signature campaigns. Someone could use AI to grow up accounts and then sell them or use them in an organic way once they hit legendary status, that's why i think is a forum problem and not only a signatures problem.

Ehhhh... There's nothing new in seeing a long wall of crap from low ranking members.. what makes it look refined and more disturbing is when it comes from members like this (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=1199571).We still have a couple of them, especially in the gambling discussion board. now, all we need is time and dedication to show them to their fate.

Actually, there are potential users that write them post genuinely, without any third-party bot support whatsoever... It's always obvious as so Many users would pay attention to the wordings,sentence formation and typos, before relating it to an AI bot for comparative detection. I read this somewhere on these thread (but I can't recall where that was) -  AI generated texts have been known to not be originally created by AIs. They only pick fragments of informations from different documentaries about the said topic and.... Boom, food is ready!

It's all of those, and it's a problem across every social network that exists right now. Would you agree?

I mean come on, there's fake shit everywhere! XD

It's like how they teach us about "Dark matter". Apparently 99% of the universe is shit we cant see called "Dark matter".

Yeah?

Well 99% of the internet feels fake right now. Fake accounts, fake likes, fake views...

How is the data anyone selling to each other even reliable LOL? Nothing's real.

I agree. If this will only the possible way to discourage using AI, then so be it. Anyone gets caught should be punished and should be out of the campaign, otherwise the campaign manager might possibly be put at risk. Although this could be additional job for campaign managers, but I think that’s part of their job to protect the campaign from getting copy right information that are intentionally done by members of the campaign.

And it has been like that since the start, let's remember that old meme (even older than the meme word).


And AI just make it worst, lol.

Good meme 😂. I like it, thanks for sharing. Totally stealing it so I can send it to my friends :3.

obviously at some point, there will be some AI tool that you let loose on the forum and it just is autonomous. it will read different threads and make replies in some of them and be doing that all day long  :o

24/7/365. but that would be another way to detect them. so they would have to break it into work shifts where it went on posting sprees of 5 or 6 hours and then went dark for 18 or so hours. because most people sleep.

show me one account like that. i bet its pretty rare. so i don't think that's the main problem. plus who is buying established accounts? no one has ever offered me anything to buy my account from ME.  :o I'm not even sure why they would do that. unless they are looking to just spam the forum. which wont last too long.

The problem with this one is that some people don't really like it even if you're honest about your involvement with AI because they don't appreciate the fact that your post isn't organic and that you claim that your post is informed opinion when it's just a generated nonsense from an AI that was made to look like it came from your head and not computer generated. Although they might forgive you a little for the honesty that you've used an AI, you will not get anything out of all of this and at the same time, your post from that point in time including your past post would be in scrutiny because they want to see if you're not a first offender and that this might not be your only time that you've used an AI, what basically this confession would lead to is just people getting in the ignored list of a lot of people and possibly a lot of reports because of how they've conducted themselves.

In my opinion, the stance on AI posts here in the forum is that of someone is using an AI to write a novel, as a publisher, you're never going to want all of that as a book because you know that it would serve only nothing but just a quota for the writer and nothing more, no emotions and hard work were poured into it besides the creativity in the prompts and it's not human enough to make AI post a thing in this forum and we will eventually arrive in a point where we don't care anymore because we've tolerated AI as a way to fulfill post counts.

I even saw g00gle AI recommending someone to jump of the Golden Gate Bridge as a cure for depression, because one reddit user suggested it  ::)
This looks like a perfect new army of government ''workers'', they never complains, they are never hungry, and they don't ask to be paid anything.
Spammers and scammers are going to be top AI users, if they are not already.

I guess that won’t create a problem if there won’t be any stupid buyer thinking to buy on that. Although I have no issues on buying account, but one should be well responsible as well to check and verify the account first before buying if there are no suspicious and AI generated posts that will put the new owner at a risk, losing all the opportunities that he might be taking advantage in the forum. Otherwise, it will be his sole problem already once the forum takes tight rule in combatting AI posts.

I have to say this one is true. Detecting AI generated posts could be easier to say but when you are in the process, it might be harder than it is, most especially if you simply check his current posts without going deep into his past history. Probably the reason why these AI users are even motivated to continue what they’re doing because it will be harder for them to get caught. And maybe if they get caught, that would mean an extra work for this forum admin. Something that I can really say detecting AI post is really hard and somewhat tricky.

But there have been examples where one could clearly see that there has been intentional usage of AI to generate texts. Should we just keep ignoring such cases? How different is that from plagiarism that has been demonized in the forum from almost as long as it has existed?

I think the forum administration needs to come out on this, otherwise if we condone it, then plagiarism should also be condoned since it's also "hard to detect" at times

It's because spammers and scammers don't realize that AI is supposed to just be a tool to augment something, not entirely replace it.

Like, Chat GPT is really good at telling you how to do something simply, or making a guide on how to start a fire. It's not going to, nor is it supposed to, start the fire for you IRL.

Idk if that's a shitty example, but yeah.

I disagree - a lot of development in AI is to replace the human, such as in warehouse or other repetitive/dangerous/expensive work.

As a young mental health professional, you would view AI as a tool to help you, because your job will be one of the last to be replaced.  :) 

I'd expect regulators to act on this, but it's going to take many years before they do something. And given the great "success" of having cookie warnings everywhere, I don't have high hopes. Making the AI-manufacturers liable for the problems caused by their software would probably end this, but that's "killing innovation". Add a strong lobby, and I don't expect improvements.

There is a lot of money to be made via LLMs (which is really what the OP is referring to), and that is not from sig deals. The creators of LLMs want their models to be relevant and accurate, so I somewhat understand why some might use the forum to create LLM-created posts, although there are probably some ethical issues in doing so.

Anything a LLM says is not plagiarism. If there is a topic that I find interesting regarding something I don't know a lot about, I might read articles from what I believe to be reputable sources, and I might paraphrase information that I find across several sources in my post. That is essentially what a LLM does.

Any university would require you to credit the sources, and if not, it's plagiarism.

I also was using the grammarly as a supportive measure to atleast straighten and make my grammar a little bit readable but the whole chaos with AI generated or correct post made me let go because it got to a particular period when I actually felt that even the use of grammarly could be classified as AI aided post or write but I know all the writes up are made originally by me, it's just that the grammarly too helps me rearrange them to put the right punctuation and grammar set up in the right order.

I buy the idea of having a separate board created for AI generated essays, even though that it would create a divide because any topics already created by human intelligence may have a different ring to it if created using AI.
I read here where someone suggested that users who make comments or create post using Ai, should indicate at the end or leave something like a footnote to state it was created by AI.

In all, the essence of having a community like this where we as humans from different regions in the world can share real experiences and ideas that isn't AI generated, is simply beautiful and I have always loved to partake in the reasoning of others as much I share mine, mostly those of whom I have neither seen or met or belong with in same age bracket.

Let me correct that for you. Everything an LLM or text generator writes can be plagiarism, depending on how you use it.

Acquiring knowledge by reading what others have said on a particular topic and then explaining or writing about it the way you remembered it is not plagiarism. If it was, most of the stuff we say about Bitcoin could be classified as plagiarism. A simple question, like explaining what Bitcoin is can't be answered without saying something that other people haven't already said in the past (most probably).

Plagiarism is often about intention. If you find a research on hardware wallets and make it sound like you made the research, it's plagiarism. You can't write about that on the forum by saying that you conducted the research, you talked with experts, you spent hours configuring and working with the devices, if it was someone else who did it.

Grammarly doesn't generate text on its own. It corrects the grammar of existing text you feed into it. You should be fine using Grammarly. No one should get into trouble for doing extra work to make their posts better, especially if English isn't their first language. It would be unfair if the admins punished users for using Grammarly.