AI writing messages on Bitcointalk.org

[fillippone]

Thinking to what happened in the GME drama:

Same goes with Silver. Do you know which hedge fund is very long silver?
Pick one...

Answer: Citadel. Exactely. The very same Citadel that owns RobinHood and was forced to bail out Melvin capital.
Oh, the irony.

Is there a source for that?
<...>

Plenty:

Citadel Silver Holding Exposes Rifts in WallStreetBets Army

The precious metal has become a popular buying target for retail investors keen to inflict losses on hedge funds, after posts on WallStreetBets claimed the market was ripe for a short squeeze. Yet some members of the Reddit forum have responded with pleas to avoid the trade, saying Citadel stands to benefit as a major holder of the largest silver exchange-traded fund.

“CITADEL IS THE 5TH LARGEST OWNER OF SLV,” one WallStreetBets user wrote on Sunday, referring to the iShares trust’s ticker symbol. “IT’S IMPERATIVE WE DO NOT ‘SQUEEZE’ IT.”

Actually some one suggested the redditors pushing for the silver squeeze were a little bit, “odd” to the group not to think they were actually Citadel minions undercover.

Well, if I were Citadel this is exactly what I would try to do: train my post writing AI to post like a redditor, and flood the r/WallStreetBets with messages trying to organise a short squeeze of an asset I am long in.

Just because.

[1714942241]

1714942241

[1714942241]

1714942241

[hilariousetc]

Once again another reason for signature vacation time.

Every week  flip a coin and either shut signatures off or turn them back on.

Makes bots and ai have less reason to post if there are no signature revenues.


Unfortunately our forum is existing for the wrong reasons.  

Signature revenue is a shitty reason to exist.
Spam is worse.
Scammers are the worst.
Trolling fit in there somewhere but not as bad as a scammer.


At loyce how about scraping a signature campaign thread and estimate what it pays each week.

I often complain about signatures and have asked for signature vacation time.
So here is another reason to try it out.

With any measures you employ to stop spam you need to make sure it's not effecting real or genuine users or effects them as little as possible. If you turned signatures on and off again then all this will lead to is the bots having a vacation during that time whilst genuine users are penalised during it. Many people use their signature for different things other than signature campaigns like you do, but I don't think genuine users should be penalised because of potential bad actors. These restrictions won't even be a inconvenience to bots and they'll just reconfigure to work with it and then fire back up when they can monetise it. I think this now more than ever needs to lead to urging campaign managers to do their job properly. If campaign managers thoroughly vetted their participants and only accepted quality posters then there wouldn't be a problem with spam or shitposting and bots probably wouldn't even get on the campaigns in the first place. I've long said signature campaigns could help to actually improve the forum but only if they're run by managers that do their job properly.

[actmyname]

I've long said signature campaigns could help to actually improve the forum but only if they're run by managers that do their job properly.

Bounties are not helping this problem. Forget about an entry fee to creating a signature campaign or requiring a useful product. You'll have an army of spammers at your feet that are also happier when your token is worth something: double the scam fiesta!

[muenze]

It seems to happen in the ETH threads in Altcoin Discussion/Speculation a lot.

They just seem to use text spinners and copy & paste (or use bots to write) the same replies over and over just exchanging certain words with other words with the same meaning. Some spinners can even change sentences around and all that.

It would be nice to have some board where signatures and avatars are not shown at all (and not counted for Sig campaigns).

[fillippone]

I am bringing this thread back from the dead as the recent overhaul of Google OpenAI platform made GPT available:

https://chat.openai.com/chat

Lets’s see how it replies to the last message of this threads

It seems to happen in the ETH threads in Altcoin Discussion/Speculation a lot.

They just seem to use text spinners and copy & paste (or use bots to write) the same replies over and over just exchanging certain words with other words with the same meaning. Some spinners can even change sentences around and all that.

It would be nice to have some board where signatures and avatars are not shown at all (and not counted for Sig campaigns).

It is not uncommon for people to use automated tools, such as text spinners, to generate content in online forums. This can be frustrating for other users who are trying to have meaningful discussions. One solution to this problem might be to create a board where signatures and avatars are not displayed, as you suggested. This would remove some of the incentives for people to use these tools, as they would not be able to promote themselves or their products through their signatures and avatars. However, it is also important to enforce rules against the use of automated tools in order to prevent this behavior from continuing.

Looks a more than decent answers to me.

[PrimeNumber7]

I am bringing this thread back from the dead as the recent overhaul of Google OpenAI platform made GPT available:

https://chat.openai.com/chat

Lets’s see how it replies to the last message of this threads

It seems to happen in the ETH threads in Altcoin Discussion/Speculation a lot.

They just seem to use text spinners and copy & paste (or use bots to write) the same replies over and over just exchanging certain words with other words with the same meaning. Some spinners can even change sentences around and all that.

It would be nice to have some board where signatures and avatars are not shown at all (and not counted for Sig campaigns).

It is not uncommon for people to use automated tools, such as text spinners, to generate content in online forums. This can be frustrating for other users who are trying to have meaningful discussions. One solution to this problem might be to create a board where signatures and avatars are not displayed, as you suggested. This would remove some of the incentives for people to use these tools, as they would not be able to promote themselves or their products through their signatures and avatars. However, it is also important to enforce rules against the use of automated tools in order to prevent this behavior from continuing.

Looks a more than decent answers to me.

Haha. It is not wrong.

If you look closely at the post it is replying to though, it is really not doing much more than repeating the points made by muenze and agreeing with them. All it really added was that the rules should be enforced.

[LoyceV]

it is really not doing much more than repeating the points

So do many users

[NotATether]

I've lately seen threads on the service board advertising AI-generated articles and posts. But everyone will know that these posts are written by a robot because it won't fit properly in a conversation (unlike the master AI above me).

[dkbit98]

Looks a more than decent answers to me.

Do you think anyone can use this G-OpenAI platform to write posts in bitcointalk forum, and is there a way to detect this?
Maybe we need to have some kind of detector for text written by bots, but I often think that some people are worst than AI after I read their posts 

[Stalker22]

The fact that AI-generated content is so difficult to detect suggests that progress in this field has been extremely rapid. It is remarkable how quickly advances are being made in this space. I have heard that some news outlets are already using AI-generated content in their publications, and it is easy to imagine that in a few years they will be so capable that they can produce content that is indistinguishable from real human writing.

So would it make sense to try to detect AI-generated content with an AI classification model? The training data for such a model would need to include both an AI-generated dataset and examples of human-generated content. And then train a classification algorithm to separate AI-generated content from human-generated one. Would that be possible?

[fillippone]

Looks a more than decent answers to me.

Do you think anyone can use this G-OpenAI platform to write posts in bitcointalk forum, and is there a way to detect this?
Maybe we need to have some kind of detector for text written by bots, but I often think that some people are worst than AI after I read their posts 

For sure this can happen.
And, as far as I can see from the various example I see around, ti might well already be the case.
If you search for that, you'll see dozen of AI- based services selling AI generated blog posts, Longform, twitter thread and so on.

[actmyname]

Do you think anyone can use this G-OpenAI platform to write posts in bitcointalk forum, and is there a way to detect this?
Maybe we need to have some kind of detector for text written by bots, but I often think that some people are worst than AI after I read their posts  

You would probably need to insert the thread history as a contextual basis if you wanted consistency. I mentioned use of GLTR in a previous thread.

You can tell from the prose whether a writer is human or not. Though, from some of the higher-end side, it is quite pleasant to read. Maybe it's low-effort, but if someone were to generate and pick out interesting AI-generated content as a substitute to writing compelling responses (i.e. prompt-writing vs. exhaustive creation) that would be far better than most things posted out there. An interesting question to raise is whether it could be construed as plagiarism. And subsequently, what changes would be necessary to transform it into an independent derivation, if any at all?*

* consider if this post was AI-generated (in any capacity)

[NotATether]

The fact that AI-generated content is so difficult to detect suggests that progress in this field has been extremely rapid. It is remarkable how quickly advances are being made in this space. I have heard that some news outlets are already using AI-generated content in their publications, and it is easy to imagine that in a few years they will be so capable that they can produce content that is indistinguishable from real human writing.

Currently, AI is capable of writing articles with the quality of an amateur copywriter. It is not difficult for me to measure the quality of articles, despite the distinction between being a robot or just a bad writer being unknown to me.

* consider if this post was AI-generated (in any capacity)

AI Turing Test failed - AI doesn't know how to quote replies. 

[PrimeNumber7]

it is really not doing much more than repeating the points

So do many users

My response is based on the assumption that by "users" you mean "people who write on the forum"

Maybe, maybe not. There are a lot of posts that are sufficiently bad that it makes it difficult to believe they are actually written by real people. Sure, some people may not care to put a lot of effort into their posts, and some people may not be especially intelligent, but I find it hard to believe these are reasons why we have so many shit posts, given the scale of the problem.

Looks a more than decent answers to me.

Do you think anyone can use this G-OpenAI platform to write posts in bitcointalk forum, and is there a way to detect this?
Maybe we need to have some kind of detector for text written by bots, but I often think that some people are worst than AI after I read their posts  

Posts written by a GAN (such as the one used on the G-OpenAI platform) can be passed through a discriminator model.

A better solution would probably to group posts potentially written by a GAN with all other posts, and enforce the rules accordingly. Would the "post" that fillippone generated meet the criteria for not being removed by the moderators? Maybe, maybe not. I would lean towards no though.

[aysg76]

I've lately seen threads on the service board advertising AI-generated articles and posts. But everyone will know that these posts are written by a robot because it won't fit properly in a conversation (unlike the master AI above me).

Yeah at these times we can detect the sentences written by AI because at some point you will feel it's not mixing up to make a valid point like google translator but with advancement in technology and better programming AI is capable of writing really good posts which can't be easily caught by us.

So do many users

They are setting up base content for bots to write articles but the thing is AI will improve with time while those members keep repeating the same points after years also just to write posts.

[Welsh]

So would it make sense to try to detect AI-generated content with an AI classification model? The training data for such a model would need to include both an AI-generated dataset and examples of human-generated content. And then train a classification algorithm to separate AI-generated content from human-generated one. Would that be possible?

For the forum? Probably not. Other areas of the internet, likely will implement this, and I imagine even Google will come up with something to combat this sort of stuff on their own platforms. As for the forum, we probably don't see enough of it, and when it does happen if it's so indistinguishable that we haven't noticed it probably isn't that big of a deal. I know that sounds a little weird, but the thing about low quality posts is they tend to derail, and interrupt the reading experience of others, which is problematic. When you can generate posts which aren't doing that, yeah it's a issue, but its not a massive problem if no one notices.

I'm not sure if that's coming across clear enough there, but I do think this will present a problem going forward, but I haven't looked into it enough to figure out how much of a problem that might be. There has to be incentive there for someone to do this, engaging on a forum probably isn't enough. You could argue signature campaigns, but there's a distinctive difference to a high quality poster to someone who's using these tools. Even the examples above, despite being pretty good in terms of staying on topic, they aren't really saying a whole lot. It's rather generic.

[hopenotlate]

I read the article linked in the original message with interest and I came away impressed and destabilized: these are topics almost completely unknown to me and I feel cut out of an incoming revolution.
But it seems that they have already taken hold not only  on this forum :  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5417309.0

[dkbit98]

The fact that AI-generated content is so difficult to detect suggests that progress in this field has been extremely rapid. It is remarkable how quickly advances are being made in this space.

I don't think it's do difficult to detect posts like this, especially if they are repeating the same style.
With few simple questions asked in topic or sent in PM I could quickly determine if I am talking with real member or not.

For sure this can happen.
And, as far as I can see from the various example I see around, ti might well already be the case.
If you search for that, you'll see dozen of AI- based services selling AI generated blog posts, Longform, twitter thread and so on.

If this is really the case than we should start reporting posts like that, suspected to be AI generated, in same way we report low quality spam posts.
I would even go as far to temp-ban members who are doing this repeatedly, and  full ban can be applied for extreme cases.

[fillippone]

For sure this can happen.
And, as far as I can see from the various example I see around, ti might well already be the case.
If you search for that, you'll see dozen of AI- based services selling AI generated blog posts, Longform, twitter thread and so on.

If this is really the case than we should start reporting posts like that, suspected to be AI generated, in same way we report low quality spam posts.
I would even go as far to temp-ban members who are doing this repeatedly, and  full ban can be applied for extreme cases.

The writing style can be quite varied.
See this example:



I don't know what happens if we feed the AI with LoyceV post, but I guess the AI could imitate his writing style, language nuances, lateral humor etc.

[LoyceV]

The writing style can be quite varied.
See this example:

It's still what I would call a "generic shitpost". It's all more or less correct, but doesn't add anything.

I don't know what happens if we feed the AI with LoyceV post, but I guess the AI could imitate his writing style, language nuances, lateral humor etc.

Try it
Take this post, see if it can write my February 26, 2025 post for me. (I didn't create an account to try)