Timeline for Recognizing generic ChatGPT posts
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
15 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 21, 2023 at 18:23 | comment | added | Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ | Thank you for your thoughts. Gonna consider it over night. Right now I gotta feed my brood. | |
| Jun 21, 2023 at 18:12 | comment | added | ColleenV | I have detected most of the plagiarized posts I flagged simply by noticing copy-paste errors that didn't convert into Markdown properly, which made me suspicious, which led to more investigation, which made me confident something was actually plagiarized. It's not "gut feelings". It's exploiting the fact that people plagiarizing posts or copying and pasting ChatGPT generated text aren't inclined to spend a lot of effort on their posts. We catch sock puppeteers the same way. It's a lot of work to pretend to be multiple people, and the shortcuts they take can stand out to an experienced eye. | |
| Jun 21, 2023 at 18:08 | comment | added | ColleenV | @Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ I respect that the mods don't want to share explicit details of their key indicators because it will help bad actors evade detection, but frankly, if you have to very secretive about your detection methodology in general, your tools suck, you lack proper resources or you're too focused on enforcing a rule for the sake of the rule. (In this case, I think it's the first two) It's not a good idea for the entire community to be using the same indicators anyhow. There's a difference in knowing what sorts of things to be on the lookout for, and a checklist of 'proof'. | |
| Jun 21, 2023 at 18:00 | comment | added | Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ | @ColleenV This is kind of catch-22ish. "the flagger should explain why they suspect it's AI"...yet the Mods do not want want to share their thinking on identifying possible ChatGPT because as Andrew put it,"“Dear moderators, Please tell us how you detected this so that the unscrupulous can defeat those methods and make it much harder for you. Thanks." There is a major disconnect there, and I am sorry if you guys cannot see it. This feels like "mushroom management" | |
| Jun 21, 2023 at 10:16 | comment | added | Mari-Lou A | This is where it all ends. Not with a bang but with GenAI sponsorships. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 19:14 | comment | added | ColleenV | @Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ Why? Only mods have the tools to act on such a suspicion fairly and the flagger should explain why they suspect it's AI anyhow. Just use the flag for moderator attention. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 19:11 | comment | added | Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ | @ColleenV Perhaps we nee a new flag " i.e. suspected AI generation | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 19:08 | comment | added | ColleenV | @Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ You use your judgment and ask a team of moderators to confirm. There is no algorithm that can distinguish AI text from human written in all circumstances. Fortunately, this isn't a court of law, and the consequences for accidentally mistaking a human written text for AI aren't severe or irreversible. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 18:43 | comment | added | ColleenV | @Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ Without access to some of the info mods have, I think it will be difficult to "prove" they're AI beyond a reasonable doubt. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 18:37 | comment | added | Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ | @ColleenV I am reviewing some questionable past posts with the idea of identifying AI Chat posts...and I can see there were many starting about 3 months ago. 3 months ago. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 18:33 | comment | added | ColleenV | @Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ I can tell the difference between a verbose human and AI. Indian English has its own flow that is quite distinct from robo-text. There is a spot on a Venn(ish) diagram where vagueness, formal fluent English, verbosity and related-but-irrelevant-in-this-context detail overlap that is only occupied by AI and a couple of humans who can be filtered out by other factors. If I could give you an exact formula, AI would be able to fool me more often than it does. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 18:05 | comment | added | Cascabel_StandWithUkraine_ | @ColleenV There are also real people who have issues picking up on context clues. I am reminded of this "answer". Also, India people are often considered "verbose" by Westerners. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 16:39 | comment | added | ColleenV | The other hallmark of an LLM answer is that it's somewhat relevant but tends to miss implied parts of the question and add related but irrelevant detail. If you look at the human answers in comparison, they focus on how "take" is used in that context, or suggest alternatives replacing just the key word of the phrase. They don't suggest things that are rarer than the phrase asked about like "Antidifferentiate the function". AI doesn't understand context cues that most humans pick up on rather easily. Fluent English that misses inferences about the question obvious to a human is my indicator. | |
| Jun 20, 2023 at 14:22 | history | edited | Heartspring | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 457 characters in body
|
| Jun 20, 2023 at 6:35 | history | answered | Andrew LeachMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |