Acceptable uses of AI in the forum (unofficial)

[Free Market Capitalist]

With the irruption of the ever increasing use of AI on the Internet since at the end of 2022 ChatGPT was publicly released we have seen an increasing use of it in the forum.

As there are no clear rules about it I have opened this thread so we can discuss and hopefully establish a set of rules about it. This thread is intended not only to provide a guide for forum members, but also for people who will register on the forum, who use the AI on a daily basis and are not clear about what can and cannot be done here.

As a general rule, using an AI to generate or modify text without mentioning it is a bad idea. You can get tagged, you can get reported, your post can get deleted, and you can even get banned. Check nutildah's AI Spam Report Reference Thread to know what you are dealing with.

ACCEPTABLE USES FOR INDIVIDUALS.

1. Quoting. If you are publishing verbatim something produced by an AI you have to quote it. Today even ChatGPT allows you to post a link to the conversation anonymously.

2. Contribute your own content to the information given to you by the AI and acknowledge it. In this case it is not about quoting, you are using information provided by the AI by providing your own content. An example would be: “According to ChatGPT xxx so I think...”

3. To summarize. If you want to refer to an article or a book in your argument, you can ask the AI to summarize it for you and use that summary as part of your argument. You have to acknowledge that as well

4. To analyze data. If you want to talk about bitcoin price behavior in the speculation section for example, you can ask the AI to do an analysis between x and y dates or to analyze the effects of interest rate policies or the supposed correlations between stock market indices and bitcoin price, etc. It costs nothing to put “Analyzed with AI”.

5.

Nutildah has given me the idea for another acceptable AI use, which is to generate images. It sounds to me that in the same way that no action is taken against anyone on the forum for posting images for alleged plagiarism, the same goes for images made with AI.

6. To use it the same way you use a search engine. If you do it that way, of course, you don't have to attribute anything to the AI, as long as the result is sourced.

7. To translate. AIs are better than automated translators and the translated text does not appear as AI generated in the detectors (or appears with a low percentage). But in this respect be aware of the unofficial rule number 27.

...in some cases content created by humans and translated with AI may appear as AI generated by the detectors, so to be on the safe side it is better to use online translators than AI, although I am sure that in the not too distant future they will be integrated.

USES FOR BUSINESSES.

1. Using AI to do your business presentation is something that is becoming more and more common, and on the forum it is generally tolerated. The business is created or bought by you, you feed the data to the AI and it makes a presentation for you. It seems that neither the forum moderation nor the members have much against it.

2. But using an AI to answer questions members ask about your business is a bad idea. This forum values human interaction and copy-pasting to answer what we ask will be detrimental to the possible popularity you can acquire.

Work in progress.

[Mia Chloe]

Most of the things you made mention of here are quite normal and occur most times but you seldom see people quote AI here. If we fully allow the use of AI that it becomes a normal thing then post quality will drop drastically because the contemplation would be , why waste time on research when I can just ask an AI and then paste it here in quotes.

The idea of using AI too much is more like a plagiarism issue because in the  end no matter how much you try to put it you are still copying a text or idea that isn't yours.

Adding a good AI to sources for your research is fine since you will actually gather information from different places then drop an authentic post based on what you gather rather than just quoting to post. It will promote low quality posts......

[Alpha Marine]

It will become too inconsistent. How do we truly determine when a person uses an AI or when he did not when there are so many exceptions?
In a discussion, I see no use for AIs. AI can be used to do research and learn, but the point of a discussion is to say what you know or ask questions about things you do not understand. The point of a discussion is to state your opinion and last I checked, this is still a discussion forum.

When people educate by making a topic, they do that on things they know and include links to sources they quoted so people know where it came from and also read more on it if they want to.

In my opinion. the rules against or for AI should stay the way it is for now. Using AIs for research purposes is the best way to use AI in this regard. You can use it to compare and contrast other data you're researching.

[Excimer]

I am opening this thread so that we can discuss ways to use AI that are acceptable in this forum instead of closing ourselves off to this new technology.

I think I'm starting to understand who is behind these AI-trolls on the forum who wanted to set me up

Mr. Poker Player - I think that this is your alts. Their activity matches with yours.

Another one AI-spammer who trying set me up

RULE 3 ISNT REAL

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3688192

This guy is a 100% AI-bot. He doing spam-attack to my topics

XxXb1gB0ssXxX

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3687511

STOP AI-SPAMMERS ON BITCOINTALK!

[KingsDen]

I believe the problem with AI usage is similar to that of plagerism. No one says we shouldn't use other people's work, but when we do, we should acknowledge the owners by quoting or referencing them.

This should also be the case of AI usage, so that we will not complicate things. If anyone used AI to make a post, they should also reference or quote the AI. I think this will primarily solve the problem. If they don't, they deserve a tag or a ban.

[Ojima-ojo]

I believe the problem with AI usage is similar to that of plagerism. No one says we shouldn't use other people's work, but when we do, we should acknowledge the owners by quoting or referencing them.

This should also be the case of AI usage, so that we will not complicate things. If anyone used AI to make a post, they should also reference or quote the AI. I think this will primarily solve the problem. If they don't, they deserve a tag or a ban.

Either that being said let me advocate for something out of many forum members' thought which is that AI without human contributions is equal to zero so for sure combination of both can give us the right results needed, we can't look away from the opportunity possibilities that comes with AI and how AI help advance human efforts so as a kind of support.


That being said we consider AI as a form of support and as an alternative to human efforts just as Bitcoin is an alternative to the fiat financial system.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Most of the things you made mention of here are quite normal and occur most times but you seldom see people quote AI here. If we fully allow the use of AI ...

You haven't understood anything.

It will become too inconsistent. How do we truly determine when a person uses an AI or when he did not when there are so many exceptions?
In a discussion, I see no use for AIs.

Points 3 and 4 of the OP I took from the AI (just the points, not the subsequent explanation), so 0.62% of the OP is AI generated. Moreover, I calculated this percentage of 0.62% with the AI, so I do see a use for it.

When you get over the overdose of Doritos and Monster, we'll talk.

Apart from that, Nutildah has given me the idea for another acceptable AI use, which is to generate images. It sounds to me that in the same way that no action is taken against anyone on the forum for posting images for alleged plagiarism, the same goes for images made with AI.

[AVE5]

Most of the things you made mention of here are quite normal and occur most times but you seldom see people quote AI here. If we fully allow the use of AI that it becomes a normal thing then post quality will drop drastically because the contemplation would be , why waste time on research when I can just ask an AI and then paste it here in quotes.

The idea of using AI too much is more like a plagiarism issue because in the  end no matter how much you try to put it you are still copying a text or idea that isn't yours.

Adding a good AI to sources for your research is fine since you will actually gather information from different places then drop an authentic post based on what you gather rather than just quoting to post. It will promote low quality posts......

To an extend I go with the Op with the quest of using AI as alternative source of obtaining informations to be used on the forum. It'd had be harmful if quoted because it'd be obviously quoted that the information was generated through the use of AI's. That means users wouldn't be in claim that the post was a humanitized one. Also, it should be rate as same as when we source and quote informations from other internet places or the social networks.
But if considered a deep thought, just as you've said, it's going to be discouraging of users not building that highly classic critical mindsets in going on self research and the attributes of technical self reliance to be creative without the use of the AI.
Moreover, once user is addicted to the use of AI would become a diminishing era of humans qualities in the forum and as well will affect newbies at most because they'd become as lazy as just not to be mentally stressed at necessary human self possessions not just going to be about the forum but also in the reality world.
We can imagine if this use of AI as proposed in the forum is permitted in the schools, I guess that'd really breed dump heads of schoollars which is equivalent to the effect of users in the forum.

[bitmover]

In short, for me anything that is using AI in a way that adds value to what you are going to contribute would be an acceptable use.

If there is consensus on suggestions you make I will post them in the OP.

You can copy/paste what AI says, as long this is not the only content in your post and you explicitly quote it, so everyone knows you didn't create that content.

I use AI a lot, specially for coding. BUt you need to let everyone knows it was AI generated.
 

[Mia Chloe]

You haven't understood anything.

Smiles.... Well I think you don't really get my point too. People make use of AI alot and there isn't really anything wrong about them because they are helpful and we are in the digital era of course. But the thing is if for example you should allow the use of AI on this forum like making it acceptable as part of the rules , people will abuse it by copy pasting and that will drop post quality drastically.

I've seen some users quote AI in some threads and that was cool. People use AI as part of research tools too and that makes posts more interesting since users wouldn't just copy and paste here rather use it as just a reference.

[Doan9269]

True to what I have been saying for some time, I am opening this thread so that we can discuss ways to use AI that are acceptable in this forum instead of closing ourselves off to this new technology. I don't want to focus on the unacceptable ones because we all know what they are and there are other threads for that.

It would have been better if everyone will yield to the same pattern of adherence to this suggestion if considered by many, that they should have a designated section for that, but we cant afford to have the uniformity when dealing with a large number of people on a global forum like this, anyways, all your ideas and suggestions are well observed, but form the way i see this, the forum itself believes more on genuine and true contribution here, its may not be against the rules, but one stand the risk of being tagged for using AI, but here is my own suggestion, that if it could appear in this format, that anyone making any AI related post both contents and images should reference it under AI generated post to avoid the risk of being tagged, this is up to the community to decide on acceptability to this.

[NotATether]

AI should not be making posts on the forum. I think that's why there was pushback against JARVIS. (It would have been a chatbot that summarizes OPs using a GPT3 backend.)

[igebotz]

In short, for me anything that is using AI in a way that adds value to what you are going to contribute would be an acceptable use.

If there is consensus on suggestions you make I will post them in the OP.

You can copy/paste what AI says, as long this is not the only content in your post and you explicitly quote it, so everyone knows you didn't create that content.

I use AI a lot, specially for coding. BUt you need to let everyone knows it was AI generated.
 

Well, you barely see someone who doesn't use AI for coding these days; personally, I've grown to the point where I let AI handle 80% of my data cleaning with Python/ SQL codes for me in order to reduce my working time, I've said this before. Whether we like it or not, AI is here to stay, and it's just growing better. Most of our keyboards are now AI-powered, which improves our sentences and makes life easier.

My thoughts on AI on the forum: It should be viewed as plagiarism; if you must generate a topic with AI, you must also provide the AI source, but don't quote human replies with chatbot texts; they stink, especially on the gambling board.

AI is good but the usage is the problem - not everyone knows how to use this beautiful technology.

[criptoevangelista]

When it comes to AI, I think it's a path of no return, we have to live with it... the only thing I'm against is using it to achieve posting goals or interact with people, we all like to talk to humans and hear genuine opinions from real people. Using AI to generate opinions is where the problem lies. Using it as a tool help, I don't see any problem.

[JollyGood]

I think it is difficult to add more to your list at the moment because though it is absolutely clear AI will be making technical advances as we move forward, I would prefer it be kept out of the process that involves actual posts (the creating/editing of the words that are posted) because that is open to being exploited by spammers and account farmers.

In short, for me anything that is using AI in a way that adds value to what you are going to contribute would be an acceptable use.

If there is consensus on suggestions you make I will post them in the OP.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Smiles.... Well I think you don't really get my point too.

I do get your point, you said:

If we fully allow the use of AI that it becomes a normal thing then post quality will drop drastically because the contemplation would be , why waste time on research when I can just ask an AI and then paste it here in quotes.

I am not talking about fully allowing or disallowing.

I have opened a thread from a completely different point of view to those opened so far that focused on whether to ban the use of AI or as nutildah's, which is very useful and I myself have used but part of the part to curb the AI and not embrace it (to some reasonable extent).

[mindrust]

I wonder, Is it ethical if I ask a question to AI about some topic and post the AI’s ideas/response as of my own but with my own sentences?

I think some people might do that and nobody will notice what they are doing because online AI detection tools check the text/grammar, not the ideas in the text.

But most importantly, does it break the forum rules?

If you say “yes”, then I’ll have to ask how is that different than reading an online magazine or talking to an expert to educate yourself? Because when you interact with someone who is smarter than you, automatically some of his wisdom/data/knowledge (whatever you call it) will be written on your thoughts/brain/hard disk… that’s exactly how we educate ourselves.

Investing.com and many other famous websites are already using AI generated articles btw and I didn’t notice a difference because human generated articles were written the same way. Investing says a human author did proof reading before posting the AI generated article.

[AVE5]

When it comes to AI, I think it's a path of no return, we have to live with it... the only thing I'm against is using it to achieve posting goals or interact with people, we all like to talk to humans and hear genuine opinions from real people. Using AI to generate opinions is where the problem lies. Using it as a tool help, I don't see any problem.

Of course the use of AI can't be abolished because it's also source to carry on research and obtains valuable informations just as we're delegated with the internets.
The use of AI in the forum can be necessarily acceptable if users refers their gotten information through it without the portraying of using the AI's generated informations is being a self made but a no way at the opinions for post goals as side .

[dzungmobile]

If we fully allow the use of AI that it becomes a normal thing then post quality will drop drastically because the contemplation would be , why waste time on research when I can just ask an AI and then paste it here in quotes.

AI tools can make very high quality posts, better than most of many shitposters' posts, it's undeniable.

But it is not acceptable reason for shitposters to use AI tools for generating more quality posts than what they can do by themselves.
In my opinion, the main reason of this strict intolerance is those AI-generated posts are not works/ products of shitposters. They steal products, posts of AI tools and make it like their own posts. What for? Perhaps for finding merit with easy ways, and meeting their campaign post quota super easily without efforts.

[criptoevangelista]

Maybe (I don't know if this would be possible) if there would be a button or something like that for the user to indicate that the content said in that part of the text is from AI, things would be better and more organized, as happens in conventional social networks. In any case, there will come a point where it will be impossible to detect AI and then we would use reputation for this, with each user indicating where in their text the artificially generated content is and then the community itself would draw its own conclusions.