Acceptable uses of AI in the forum (unofficial)

[suchmoon]

Look, I even put it in giant letters for you, huh? Those might be reference/referrer codes, not referral codes. A referral code is one that earns you money for posting it, they're typical in casinos.

Nowhere does it say that a "code" is not allowed only if it earns "you" (the user) money, nor would I expect mods figure out if the code makes money for you or for ChatGPT, directly or indirectly, or if it makes money at all.

This sounds a lot like the infamous user who was very determined to sneak in plagiarised content with as little attribution as he could get away with. Sure it may work, but why? Isn't it easier to just attribute or at least remove the ref links and not waste your time coming up with excuses and rule interpretations that may or may not pass? I don't get it.

That’s a referral code, that’s what the rules prohibit. And I’m telling you this with full knowledge because I’ve reported quite a few that were deleted, and the report was marked as valid.

Ok, great. I don't see how that invalidates every other type of referral but if it does, good for you. Carry on.

[Vod]

Look, I even put it in giant letters for you, huh? Those might be reference/referrer codes, not referral codes. A referral code is one that earns you money for posting it, they're typical in casinos.

Nowhere does it say that a "code" is not allowed only if it earns "you" (the user) money, nor would I expect mods figure out if the code makes money for you or for ChatGPT, directly or indirectly, or if it makes money at all.rry on.

That's a good point.   The rules should be clarified to state a referral code is something you gain benefit from.   Example, if I post a youtube link to start at a certain time (adds a ?t), I don't want to be accused of posting a referral code.

The proper term for an item following a website with "?' is a parameter.  All referral codes are parameters, but all parameters are not referral codes.  Hope this helps the discussion.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Nowhere does it say that a "code" is not allowed only if it earns "you" (the user) money, nor would I expect mods figure out if the code makes money for you or for ChatGPT, directly or indirectly, or if it makes money at all.

The rule is very clear, and it’s meant to prevent referral spam, no matter how much your prejudice against AI makes you find all sorts of arguments against it. I just reported my post for supposedly breaking rule 4, let’s see what they say.

This sounds a lot like the infamous user who was very determined to sneak in plagiarised content...

That’s what it sounds like to you, which isn’t surprising given your prejudices. And since things “sound” to you, I don’t know why you don’t throw in some aliens into the story while you’re at it.

Ok, great. I don't see how that invalidates every other type of referral but if it does, good for you. Carry on.

The difference is that when I spam the forum with my referral number, that number is my own personal code. That’s the difference.

You, on the other hand, think it’s wrong to use ChatGPT to find links and not mention that you used ChatGPT, and if the links contain a reference indicating they were found through ChatGPT, you also think it’s wrong. So, basically, you think everything is wrong. You carry on, too.

This is what ChatGPT says about it:

No, I don't earn any money from the links I provide or through any kind of referral. When I perform a web search and share links or information with you, my only goal is to provide you with the best possible answer, without any commercial interest or financial incentive. I don't have any affiliate deals or partnerships with external websites.

So no, it's not referral code spam.

And now, to (hopefully) wrap up this discussion, my report of the post for breaking rule 4 has been marked as "bad," and the post is still there, untouched.

[OgNasty]

I personally love making little AI cartoons to post alongside my posts, but have learned that it isn't always appreciated by others.  Especially by those who are on low resolution monitors and see small images as full screen...  I do like that you can use AI to set the record straight.  For example, I have quite a few delusional trolls who spend what I would consider to be a mentally ill amount of time spreading lies about my contributions to Bitcoin and this forum.  It is nice to be able to use AI to quickly and easily TELL THE TRUTH without emotions or egos clouding judgement.  As not everyone has the time to read through 14 years of posts to learn the truth.

[Free Market Capitalist]

Today I wanted to comment on a possible use of the AI that I have sometimes used outside the forum and thought maybe it could be used here but in the end I found out it could not. It consists of you writing a text and asking the AI to optimize it. I have used it sometimes when I was not happy with what I wrote, I passed it to the AI and it usually gives you several options to choose from.

In the last thread I opened I did that but in the end I ruled out using an AI modified version.

I was not convinced by any alternative version, besides the fact that when I ran it through the AI detectors it resulted in 100% AI generated, which is not entirely correct since both the ideas presented and the structure started from me. With a lesser result (and if I had liked any of the versions) I could have used one of the versions putting at the end something like: “written by me, optimized by AI”. But with that result it would be hard to believe that the text was based on an original text that I wrote.

Anyway, I will keep thinking and trying ways.

[The Cryptovator]

To me, AI shouldn't underestimate anyway. AI captured a large market in the online world. But it needs to be used properly. For example, you may create codes through AI. You may try to create some good codes, like creating a marketplace or something like this. On the other hand, you may also create hacking codes that could help hack somehow, or you may create scamming sites through AI codes. It means it depends on your intention of using AI, either it should be discouraged or encouraged.  If your forum posts fully depend on AI, then it should be discouraged, but if you use it to fix grammar, then it shouldn't be discouraged anyway.

[igebotz]

but if you use it to fix grammar, then it shouldn't be discouraged anyway.

We're already having some few issues on this thread - non- native English posters are getting nailed for using AI to correct their sentences and grammar to native standard..

It's going to create a lot of false positive reports if care is not taken and if we solely depends on those tools.

The exciting thing about AI is no one needs to accept it, it's already part of our daily lives except you live under the rock.

[nutildah]

but if you use it to fix grammar, then it shouldn't be discouraged anyway.

We're already having some few issues on this thread - non- native English posters are getting nailed for using AI to correct their sentences and grammar to native standard..

It's going to create a lot of false positive reports if care is not taken and if we solely depends on those tools.

They aren't false positives though. They are legitimate positives.

-i have never, nor will i ever, do anything in the past or in the future, except ask the AI to correct me where i am not confident about my english (which should not be a problem for you).

A false positive is when wholly-human generated (AI-unassisted) text gets detected as AI-generated. This usually only happens when the detector sample size is very small (short posts).

Furthermore, I believe it is in the welfare and best interest of the forum as a whole to keep AI-generated text to a minimum, otherwise its going to start having a negative impact on the forum's SEO scores, theoretically leading to lower search rankings and decreased traffic.

Further furthermore, we should be encouraging people to learn English if they want to get paid for posting on an English language forum, instead of relying on tools that encourage laziness.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

We're already having some few issues on this thread - non- native English posters are getting nailed for using AI to correct their sentences and grammar to native standard..

It's going to create a lot of false positive reports if care is not taken and if we solely depends on those tools.

I use AI to translate my posts, just as I used to use Deepl. I have Cambridge C2 and am fluent in speaking but I discovered a while ago that I am more productive if I write it in my native language and then translate. Sometimes I have checked my posts and they come out as 0% AI generated or a very low percentage.

Further furthermore, we should be encouraging people to learn English if they want to get paid for posting on an English language forum, instead of relying on tools that encourage laziness.

I don't agree on this because of what I've just exposed.

[shield132]

AI shouldn't be used to replace real humans on this forum, it also shouldn't be used to write on topics that you have no idea what they are about. I use AI as a helper hand in my job to boost my work and have more time for rest or personal development.

At the moment, I think that AI can be used in a few ways. AI is a great tool to summarize a big text. When someone creates a thread about big news, they can use AI to shorten text and then include a source of big text in their thread. There are also moments when someone creates a huge post, which is very boring to read. Such users should be able to use AI to shorten their text but their original, long text should also be included. I believe that it's also okay to use AI to create images, charts and other visual content to share on this forum.

I can't think of other options where AI can be tolerated besides these two cases.

[igebotz]

They aren't false positives though. They are legitimate positives.

Unfortunately most of the current reports are - the forum, signature managers needs to understand the difference between AI-generated posts and AI refined posts- the later is good use of AI.

This is what quillbot ( one of the advanced AI tools) has to say about the two and how false positive can be created.

Paraphrasing and grammar checking tools are ethical uses of AI writing technology. They help millions of non-native English speakers and writers refine their text and express their ideas fluently.

But most AI detectors can’t tell the difference between text that’s been created with generative AI tools—such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and others—and text that’s been refined using assistive tools. This leads to false positives and cultural bias.

https://quillbot.com/ai-content-detector

Further furthermore, we should be encouraging people to learn English if they want to get paid for posting on an English language forum, instead of relying on tools that encourage laziness.

Using AI to refine their OWN opinion/posts to communicate with native English speakers fluently are also a way of learning. No non-native English posters deserves to be tagged AI spammer for using AI ethically. ( It's becoming a norms)

[Free Market Capitalist]

Unfortunately most of the current reports are - the forum, signature managers needs to understand the difference between AI-generated posts and AI refined posts- the later is good use of AI.

This is what quillbot ( one of the advanced AI tools) has to say about the two and how false positive can be created.

Paraphrasing and grammar checking tools are ethical uses of AI writing technology. They help millions of non-native English speakers and writers refine their text and express their ideas fluently.

But most AI detectors can’t tell the difference between text that’s been created with generative AI tools—such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and others—and text that’s been refined using assistive tools. This leads to false positives and cultural bias.

https://quillbot.com/ai-content-detector

Further furthermore, we should be encouraging people to learn English if they want to get paid for posting on an English language forum, instead of relying on tools that encourage laziness.

Using AI to refine their OWN opinion/posts to communicate with native English speakers fluently are also a way of learning. No non-native English posters deserves to be tagged AI spammer for using AI ethically. ( It's becoming a norms)

But we have to draw a line. I myself will not publish anything that I have created if I pass it through an AI and it showsup as 100% AI generated by the detectors, as I discussed. Give a pass to that means giving a free pass to AI spammers.

What your colleagues have to do is to pass their text through AI detectors, and if they get a result of 100% AI generated modify the result. The rules in the nutildah's thread are quite lenient on the subject tbh, they let you post texts with up to 70% AI generated.

And to participate in this forum in the English section it's all very well that you are not a native English speaker and don't have absolute command of English but if you can't modify the 100% result to bring it down to acceptable levels using your own words it's not a matter of discrimination, you don't have enough level to participate in it.

I am going to update the OP.

[The Cryptovator]

but if you use it to fix grammar, then it shouldn't be discouraged anyway.

We're already having some few issues on this thread - non- native English posters are getting nailed for using AI to correct their sentences and grammar to native standard..

I am aware of this. Because even I faced it. However, my mistake was using ChatGPT with the command "rewrite the below article," so ChatGPT rewrote it in native English. I admit that I used and explained there as well. Since it wasn't welcome, I leave using ChatGPT and right now just use QuillBot to fix grammar, not to rewrite the whole article or post. So anyone getting nailed should have a proper explanation. If someone writes the full reply through AI, then the post won't be compatible with the main post. However, I am against using a bot to write the whole post just for getting paid.

[igebotz]

What your colleagues have to do is to pass their text through AI detectors, and if they get a result of 100% AI generated modify the result. The rules in the nutildah's thread are quite lenient on the subject tbh, they let you post texts with up to 70% AI generated.

The truth is that if you run an AI refined post on 5 different detector tools, you are certain to get different results; however, if you run an AI generated post on the same 5 detector tools, you will almost always get the same result--this is why you should use common sense and not base your decisions solely on what detector tools say.

This come to mind

Caution: Our AI Detector is advanced, but no detectors are 100% reliable, no matter what their accuracy scores claim. Never use AI detection alone to make decisions that could impact a person's career or academic standing.

Disclaimer on quillbot AI detector tool

I admit that I used and explained there as well. Since it wasn't welcome, I leave using ChatGPT and right now just use QuillBot to fix grammar, not to rewrite the whole article or post. So anyone getting nailed should have a proper explanation. If someone writes the full reply through AI, then the post won't be compatible with the main post. However, I am against using a bot to write the whole post just for getting paid.

Fixing grammar and punctuation marks using AI refine tools is ethical use that's the whole point of my post.

I wrote somewhere on this thread or somewhere else that some of our phones keyboard are now AI powered and auto correct grammar mistakes before you can send out any post..

[Sandra_hakeem]

It's going to create a lot of false positive reports if care is not taken and if we solely depends on those tools.

We shouldn't allow this to persist regardless, should we?

Look, things are getting a little bit more advantageous to the lazy ones; their laziness ain't my problem, using AIs for a little fixation isn't bad too, but humans are engineered for problem solving...With the level of improvements and the inaccuracies on AI detector tools, what's the percentage of posters in here that'd genuinely use these aids, should there be a rule that encourages it?

The exciting thing about AI is no one needs to accept it, it's already part of our daily lives except you live under the rock.

Why do y'all keep acting like people are all against AIs? ain't nobody! Personally, what I anticipate is nothing more than a sporadic change × time.

This come to mind

Caution: Our AI Detector is advanced, but no detectors are 100% reliable, no matter what their accuracy scores claim. Never use AI detection alone to make decisions that could impact a person's career or academic standing.

That being said, HOW do we solve this problem? What do we rely on instead? Common sense?

[nutildah]

They aren't false positives though. They are legitimate positives.

Unfortunately most of the current reports are

No, they are not. "False positive" is a technical definition. If someone uses AI in any way and a detector detects this, then it is a legitimate positive.

- the forum, signature managers needs to understand the difference between AI-generated posts and AI refined posts- the later is good use of AI.

I disagree; the reason is most posts currently being made to the forum are already quite bad... you only need to peek into any random topic in the Gambling, Altcoin Discussion or even Bitcoin Discussion boards to see this. Its an embarrassing state of affairs and has been for years. Now you are saying that the forum should be OK with allowing shitposters to use AI to refine their shitposts, and I disagree, because as was just stated:

we have to draw a line.

You might say, "Well if a post is really that bad you should report it as spam." But the problem is the bar for what is considered "spam" is already quite low in these sections, and you are proposing it should be lowered even further.

Using AI to refine their OWN opinion/posts to communicate with native English speakers fluently are also a way of learning. No non-native English posters deserves to be tagged AI spammer for using AI ethically. ( It's becoming a norms)

That's not what accounts mentioned in the AI Spam Report thread are doing, but this is the excuse they will claim when they get caught. I know they're not doing it because their posts are full of expressions overused by GPT models and follow their generic format and sentence structuring, which is easily recognizable to native English speakers. This goes beyond simple translation and is more a complete overhaul of what is being expressed.

For example,

-i have never, nor will i ever, do anything in the past or in the future, except ask the AI to correct me where i am not confident about my english

Here someone says they are using AI to correct their English, yet their posts (one of which was detected as AI-generated and deleted as spam already) are written fully in lowercase. If AI was actually correcting their English, then it would have also corrected the capitalization.

Its unwise to give the impression that posting AI-generated text on the forum is acceptable in any way, for reasons I already mentioned here.

[Free Market Capitalist]

So, it occurred to me recently to create a thread with AI for fun taking advantage of the dip after ATH and this is the result:

Bitcoin Bloodbath: Is the Bubble Finally Bursting?

This is an example of acceptable AI usage on the forum IMO and one where you don't pass off what you created with AI as your own. Although as you can see from the thread hardly anyone has bothered to look that the source article was a ChatGPT creation.

If anyone finds the thread wrong I hope they compare it to others in that section such as pushups, the nearly 1000 page Buy the Dip and HODL, the Buy Buy Buy buy Sell Sell Sell and others.

Also, I am going to modify point 7 from the OP as it seems that at least 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.

[PrimeNumber7]

So, it occurred to me recently to create a thread with AI for fun taking advantage of the dip after ATH and this is the result:

Bitcoin Bloodbath: Is the Bubble Finally Bursting?

This is an example of acceptable AI usage on the forum IMO and one where you don't pass off what you created with AI as your own. Although as you can see from the thread hardly anyone has bothered to look that the source article was a ChatGPT creation.

If anyone finds the thread wrong I hope they compare it to others in that section such as pushups, the nearly 1000 page Buy the Dip and HODL, the Buy Buy Buy buy Sell Sell Sell and others.

Also, I am going to modify point 7 from the OP as it seems that at least 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.

Are those quotes real? If they are not, it is a strong argument against using AI to post.

IMO, you should only use AI if the output is something that is interesting and/or useful to other forum members. Posting make-up quotes or made-up information is nothing other than spam.

[nutildah]

So, it occurred to me recently to create a thread with AI for fun taking advantage of the dip after ATH and this is the result:

This is meaningless drivel and near spam. It might be your right within forum rules to post it but you're making the world a stupider place to live in by doing so.

[Free Market Capitalist]

This is meaningless drivel and near spam.

I don't think so. In the forum you only see one type of opinions, the ones that are bullish on bitcoin, more or less bullish but bullish after all. However, we don't have people that have Peter Schiff style opinions. The last one I remember saying things like that was proudhon, and he hasn't been around for a while. Since I couldn't create such a thread being sincere I decided to have the AI create it for me.

It might be your right within forum rules to post it but you're making the world a stupider place to live in by doing so.

Do you mean that I've lowered even more the IQ of that section?

I think an AI is capable of doing at least as well, if not better than posts we can find on the forum like this one:

[Edited out]

Along with having your funds, it is also important to have faith. Yes, it is the faith that you will invest in volatile assets in line with reality and expand yourself in the long term cycle. We still do not know for sure about the future value of Bitcoin, but countless investors believe that its value may exceed $180k this year, so through market analysis and strategic adoption, we can assume the basis of each review. Also we are still not sure but we have been confident in accumulation Bitcoin Through discretionary income and have been maintaining a continuous stream of accumulation and countless investors continue. Faith will help keep your inner attitude in a strong position. This is a value that even if you have a lot of money, if you do not have faith, you may have a different attitude towards accepting Bitcoin and later regret it.

What you call Faith is better referred to as Bitcoin understanding. Faith is more spiritual while Understanding is practical. If a person understands bitcoin, he can be able to invest all round the circle. He trusts that bitcoin could bounce back after a correction period. He does not panic when market dips. This is because of an investors understanding. On the other hand, men that have faith do more of prayers than practice, they pray when price deals (Which also implies panic). They can easily sell off their bitcoin in panic if after a period of prayer, asking that bitcoin returns to normalcy and it doesn't happen.

Most life achievements are not by faith but understanding and practice. An investor starts doing well in bitcoin the moment he understands bitcoin features and their implications. Faith is more stressful and less practical than understanding.  Sometimes when market correction takes too long, faith may not be able to preserve your bitcoin stash but a clear understanding of those principles can sustain your bitcoin for over long periods of market correction without panicking or running into unnecessary loss.

I disagree with you bubby, because faith is faith, understanding is understanding you can't refer to faith as bitcoin understanding in matters like this so stop complicating things here.  Even if faith is more of spiritual,  Let me also remind you something incase you have forgotten, there's an ideology here that says stay consistent in buying bitcoin and hold for long term 5 to 10 years or longer and you will be in massive profits, that's if you can be able to accumulate a good portion of bitcoin, protect it and hold it for long term. the things I just said above is what you can refer to understanding in bitcoin, because the people who brought that Ideology has gained knowledge and insights through experience less say people like JJG, Michael saylor and others who have gained knowledge and insights through experience. Now less come down to faith as we all know not all of us who are investing in bitcoin have gained knowledge and insights through experience, some investors here just started their bitcoin investment last year, some this year while some few years ago, now explain to me what is making bitcoin investors who are just getting started for the first time who had not gained knowledge and insights through experience, to stay committed to their bitcoin investment and Keep accumulating bitcoin consistently and hold? Bro that's Is faith playing it own role in bitcoin investment.

I may not completely deny the existence of faith in bitcoin to some people of your own ideology but what I know that generally sustains higher percentage of bitcoin investors is BITCOIN UNDERSTANDING. I still stand by that because at that point, you've understood the real factors that could possibly influence bitcoin attitudes and you have also got to understand that Bitcoin Volatility is inevitable. Faith could possibly raise your hope that it will get better, but Understanding would make you wait longer.

Bitcoin understanding is more important for every investor and allows you understand the bitcoin cycles and why you have to hold through cycles possibly 2 cycles at least and/or through 4-10 years. At this point you expect new ATH.

Bitcoin understanding would also make you understand why having Emergency funds and back up funds is paramount. Faith alone would lead you to unsuccessful bitcoin investment when you sell due to natural occurrence. Understanding would let you build cushion against premature sales.  Faith may not let you understand also that you need to be financially knowledgeable and invest mostly by DCA and with discretionary income. Faith does not care about how  you invest, infact it pushes you into investing with all your funds allowing you think everything is all destined to be rosy.

Faith is to Bitcoin Traders as Understanding is to Bitcoin Investors.

Of course my thread is much better than this.

I think the general stupidity of that section as in general in many parts of the forum can be seen because people comment without reading the source posted on the OP or the previous comments.

By the way, I have quickseller on ignore, so don't be surprised if I don't reply.