Artificial Intelligence on the Forum

[AB de Royse777]

There is the topic, 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?

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.

[Ambatman]

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.

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.

you're gonna have to ban a looot of people

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.

[Lida93]

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.

[AbuBhakar]

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?

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, 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.

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

[Bulltard]

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.

[Stalker22]

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.

[mindrust]

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.

[mirakal]

There is the topic, 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?

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.

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.

[Bulltard]

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.

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

[Filippo Spina]

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

[Alpha Marine]

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.

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..

[Bulltard]

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.

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.

[Floxynice]

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.

[Bravut]

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.

[nutildah]

Maybe we should ask the expert  

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:
...

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.

and the mods dgaf.

Not true. The majority of posts I reported as "AI spam" have been deleted.

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

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

[LoyceV]

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.

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.

[uchegod-21]

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.

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..

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.

[Shamm]

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.

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.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

What does the forum staff think about AI-generated posts?

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.

[Mate2237]

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.