I require community feedback (Thanks)

[Igebotz]

Hello Royse777, this is my feed back.

1. There are some controversies in detecting AI written articles or posts in the forum and in the other hand, victims do not agree they use AI unless proven beyond doubt.

2. But there is a way out. There need to be a standard. Recently you kicked a user out of your campaign @bbigtart. He admitted that he was using AI for his posts. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5454218.msg62312182#msg62312182

3. The best thing to do is to use same tool that exposed @bbigtart to measure @bitcoin_people. The tool cannot be correct for @bbigtart and wrong for @Bitcoin_people.

4. I think sapling.ai was used for @bbigtart and that same sapling.ai is used for @bbigtart. The question is, will sapling be so inconsistent such that he will be correct in case one and totally wrong in case two. I don't think so... This is my feedback.

Yes, I think so. I am confident that if I use the same tool on your post history, it will return 100% AI generated results on some of your posts to show how inaccurate these AI detector tools are. As I and Lucius have stated on this thread, there are no accurate AI detectors out there that can guarantee up to 60-70% accuracy on whether a post is AI generated or not; We are still in the early stages of this development, and AI created posts tend to leave some phrases behind that indicates that the content was generated by AI. While some smart individuals always remove such phrases, gullible ones always leave them.

It should not be used on Alice just because it worked on Bob- Your sense of judgement is worrisome.

[Doan9269]

The offense of using AI is only limited to the signature campaigns rules and not included on the forum's rules, if not anyone found using such to post should be allowed to face the consequences, i believe those particular posts that shows using AI can be rechecked by members who are very good at these and verify on different tools if it's truly AI geerated post or not, if found guilty then the manager should not hesitate in doing the appropriate thing, some participants were also discovered with the use of AI while making their post and the two of them were kicked out of that same campaign, it's an offense that's more worst as plagiarism just that the forum have not taken action to kicked against it, which means it can be permitted outside participating in a signature campaign but not when you're a participant.

[rby]

4. I think sapling.ai was used for @bbigtart and that same sapling.ai is used for @bbigtart. The question is, will sapling be so inconsistent such that he will be correct in case one and totally wrong in case two. I don't think so... This is my feedback.

Yes, I think so. I am confident that if I use the same tool on your post history, it will return 100% AI generated results on some of your posts to show how inaccurate these AI detector tools are.

Nice, this could settle it for me. Visit my profile and run the test, it it returns 5% AI generated results, then sapling.ai should be banned in the forum.

It should not be used on Alice just because it worked on Bob- Your sense of judgement is worrisome.

No! Your sense of understanding failed here instead(apologies). The analogy rather is, if it worked for Alice, it should work for Bob. Humans are grossly inconsistent, but programs aren't unless some certain lines of codes are altered.

[robelneo]

Well this response from you certainly puts a new angle on the subject matter.

I have not determined or concluded whether or not AI was used but well done for you to come here and to stand your ground. If you say you did not use AI and there is no certain way to prove you did or you did not then creating this thread was probably a waste of time when the OP could have sent you a PM to discuss the issue beforehand.

Believe me I never use AI. I always try to follow the signature campaign rules and post my own way. Monitor your posts carefully with AI detector. I always write by my own hand.
And I respect my campaign manager a lot.
Basically I am very active and post for several weeks to get bonus but you can trust me I never post AI generated. I follow @Royse777 manager's campaign rules all the time and also know that AI generated posts in his campaign lead to account bans. Why would I knowingly harm myself? Please check my posts again and judge.

I'm not saying that you are wrong but Royse is right in creating this thread, this is in aid of how he will manage his campaign, AI abuse, and how to track users who abuse the privilege of being in a campaign, this discussion opens us about the unreality of some AI this is not a concern of bounty managers only but the forum as well.

[Igebotz]

4. I think sapling.ai was used for @bbigtart and that same sapling.ai is used for @bbigtart. The question is, will sapling be so inconsistent such that he will be correct in case one and totally wrong in case two. I don't think so... This is my feedback.

Yes, I think so. I am confident that if I use the same tool on your post history, it will return 100% AI generated results on some of your posts to show how inaccurate these AI detector tools are.

Nice, this could settle it for me. Visit my profile and run the test, it it returns 5% AI generated results, then sapling.ai should be banned in the forum.

Challenge accepted...

Fiat is important to bitcoin from your perception because the value of bitcoin is tied to fiat and we can only say bitcoin has risen or fallen based on its value in fiat, e.g dollar.
Can we say that if fiat doesn't exist, the value of bitcoin will not be known? That will not be correct. The value of bitcoin could be tied to another financial assets like gold. But in general it will be difficult for bitcoin in the absence of fiat.

https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector/4b39093a543b9eedbc80ed7672e754f0

No! Your sense of understanding failed here instead(apologies). The analogy rather is, if it worked for Alice, it should work for Bob. Humans are grossly inconsistent, but programs aren't unless some certain lines of codes are altered.

Maybe Royse should remove you for using AI too since what works for Alice must work for Bob 

[rby]

Nice, this could settle it for me. Visit my profile and run the test, it it returns 5% AI generated results, then sapling.ai should be banned in the forum.

Challenge accepted...
https://sapling.ai/ai-content-detector/4b39093a543b9eedbc80ed7672e754f0

Who introduced this checking tool to bitcointalk users? What was s/he thinking to discover this crap

Maybe Royse should remove you for using AI too since what works for Alice must work for Bob 

Hold!
This is a bug...
If there is no reliable tool to detect an AI written content, there's actually no way to punish offenders. This is because 99% of the offenders will not admit. So, theymos is correct for keeping mute about this AI trend.

[Yogee]

The text tested in random AI content detectors,

A side job or business can improve your financial stability if it is managed properly. and your time and resources can be referred to businesses to benefit from training that can improve your financial stability. A side job business provides the opportunity to manage your finances. and it will help you to increase your financial resources and proper fixed money system. A side business will give you the skills to work independently. And your job training will allow you to manage your work hours and set appropriate rules. This will improve the financial stability of your side business.

1. https://contentatscale.ai/ai-content-detector
"Highly likely to be Human!"

2. https://writer.com/ai-content-detector/
"5% Human-Generated content"

3. https://www.zerogpt.com/
"Your Text is human written"

4. https://copyleaks.com/ai-content-detector
"This is human text"

5. https://gptradar.com/
"Likely Human Generated"

4 out of 5 - Human

[jokers10]

...
If there is no reliable tool to detect an AI written content, there's actually no way to punish offenders. This is because 99% of the offenders will not admit. So, theymos is correct for keeping mute about this AI trend.

Well, it is usually clear enough when you just read what is written with AI usage, detectors can just reaffirm what is suspected. Last times I used https://copyleaks.com/ai-content-detector and it probably not each time correctly detects posts which are likely written with AI, but as for now it never gave a false positive result. But the sample is small, so I'm still not sure if we can believe its positive results each time, even if it didn't make such kind of mistake yet (in my practice).

As for Bitcoin_people, I'd say that AI usually does better, so it is probably not AI written. Of course I can not be sure 100%. Like nutildah said, "bland, uninformative and perfunctory". May be Bitcoin_people should think why some of his posts for some look like AI written. I tend to believe him, but it is not the 100% obvious case. By the way, copyleaks doesn't consider his posts as AI written, but it can give false negative results.

[AB de Royse777]

22 members participated on this topic excluding me but it seems none was able to conclude the case. Everyone has doubt and not 100% convinced that AI was used. These tools are useless too. The results are not accurate at all. In other two cases that happened recently, there were no confusion - not even from my investigation too so I did not need to ask others opinion. But in this case I was in doubt too. I just did not want to act harshly without investigating and taking enough opinions.

@Bitcoin_people, sorry for any inconvenience, I would like to give the benefit of the doubt in your favor.

Thanks everyone.

PS: Fixed that typo 2023 :-P