Artificial Intelligence on the Forum

[AYOBA]

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.

[LoyceV]

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.

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

[nutildah]

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.

I'd argue chatbot verbal diarrhea is plagiarism by definition.

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.

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).

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.



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 employed by Stack Overflow (which has been implemented for these very reasons):

[tread93]

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.

I'd argue chatbot verbal diarrhea is plagiarism by definition.

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.

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).

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.



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 employed by Stack Overflow (which has been implemented for these very reasons):

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.

[dkbit98]

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).

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.

[Natalim]

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).

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.

[larry_vw_1955]

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.  

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.

[LoyceV]

no person in their right mind would just go and ask chatgpt questions and copy and paste them into forum threads just for free.

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

[Filippo Spina]

no person in their right mind would just go and ask chatgpt questions and copy and paste them into forum threads just for free.

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!

[seoincorporation]

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.  

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.

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.

[Sandra_hakeem]

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.

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.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.

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.

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!

[Filippo Spina]

a forum problem and not only a signatures problem.

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.

[Distinctin]

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.  

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.

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.

[seoincorporation]

a forum problem and not only a signatures problem.

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.

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.

[Filippo Spina]

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

[larry_vw_1955]

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.

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  

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.

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.

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.   I'm not even sure why they would do that. unless they are looking to just spam the forum. which wont last too long.

[blckhawk]

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.

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.

[dkbit98]

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.

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.

[Maslate]

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.  

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.

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.

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.

[Russlenat]

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.

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.