Topic: @Lucius accusations: is there hope for all newbies? (Read 388 times)

It is said that whoever works makes mistakes, and in the future I will have to be much more careful when it comes to AI chat bots and public accusations for those who may be using them. I know I first used the disputed detector and it showed me over 70% AI content, then I checked with another one I found online (not entirely sure of the name) which also showed over 60%. I think you're right, AI will become so sophisticated that we will hardly be able to recognize whether people or bots are writing here.

---

What exactly do you mean? I just see that he quoted one of my posts, which the tool also detected as an AI generated post. Of course, it is possible to additionally disguise such posts in such a way that they are a combination of AI, paraphrasing and plagiarism.

---

There are definitely those who completely plagiarize or use AI, and I don't think that any justifications should be sought for them, but is it even possible to determine what is the permissible level of using AI tools, without having to react to it? A Legendary member was caught by you not so long ago using AI, although not in the worst way - but still in a way that his posts were not entirely original, right?

This technology's just going to keep affecting things more and more.  The quality of content on forums and such is gonna change big time as these generative AIs evolve and get better, and they will.  AI detection tools catching bot writing already proven unreliable by giving false positive results.  Plus there's already tools rewriting bot posts so they'll trick AI detection.  Not sure how we actually stop this down the road.

That's Symmetrick Ratimov was doing but for the OP, we will never know.

It still makes sense, it just generates false positives from time to time. That's why in the thread I have this clause:


I've found the 3 best ones to be Hivemoderation, Copyleaks & Sapling.ai... but you can't rely on just one. Ideally 3 should be used if there's any doubt whatsoever. There's also this other one I forgot to try out but apparently it does a decent job as well:

---

This also could be the case. But if the author is going through the trouble of doing some re-writing, that's OK with me personally, as it means they at least put some thought & time into it. If just one or two words are changed, they add the words "I personally believe" at the beginning, or they add extra punctuation or something cheesy, that's still bad.

A skilled copywriter will easily "tweak" the text so that it looks more like it was written by a human. Honestly, that's what it looks like the most to me.
That the OP is being helped by AI tools, dkbit98 found in his other post, which only strengthens my suspicions.

I don't blame you. Looking at how people using AI to make generic response, anyone can suspect a long easy and check with the tools. Fact is this tools are not 100%. They use algorithm which are not perfect. If you check same text with different tools, you will find different result. On the other hand AI is becoming smarter which is also creating confusions for the tool developers.

I have no choice but to apologize to the OP, because I checked his post with only one tool that I was sure could successfully detect content generated with AI, given that many people use it in the thread where AI generated posts are published. Obviously, it is a tool that no longer makes sense to use because it detects most posts as if they were created with AI.

Oh look I found another post that is 100% FAKE according to exact same stupid AI Sapling tool:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63403204



I am not going to blindly trust AI detection tools like this because I know they are stupid, and they can have false positives for everyone including me.
Not that I am defending or attacking anyone, just saying what I observed when I used tools like this.
Best results can be achieved when you using multiple tools to check if someone is using AI or not.

Why do some campaign members posting essay?

I agree. Writing essays doesn't give good experience to readers.

We love essays don't we? It brightens my day to login and open a topic only to see a wall of text!!!

Short n sweet can still be constructive folks. A wall of text is needed in some cases sure, but I usually like someone to get straight to the point when posting.

I checked your post through several AI content detectors, and they all agree that there is no AI-generated text, if there is, then it is a very small percentage. In the worst case, maybe you used AI to make the base, and then I adjusted and added humanity. You certainly don't need to worry about that and expect some penalties.

However, from the opening post on this topic, it can be concluded that you are misunderstanding this forum. To participate here, you do not need to write essays, because this is not a blog site. Discussions are held here based on personal views and writing blog posts is not what is like in this community.
The post that is the subject of this discussion, logically, was doubted by Lucius, because it looks like a generated text to present yourself as a serious participant and maybe earn some merit. My advice to you is to do some research on what are the useful and constructive posts here, then try to adapt to that.

Nobody is stopping you from writing as it pleases you because there are no rules that guide the length of posts. If your post is interesting people will definitely find it helpful and read them. But you should also understand that there is a need to write your post concisely and understandably. If you also check most blogs, you will agree that articles are becoming shorter so that readers can spend less time reading them. The world is now on a fast lane and everybody wants to get quality information within a short time.

I will also want to dispute your position that most users write about things that are common on the internet. But we all know that all information can be accessed online because the internet is an information bank. You might have also gotten your information from a source. If I search on some of your posts, I am sure to get hundreds of works regarding what you have written about. I suggest you search the forum in any area of Bitcoin you are interested in, I can attest that you will see several masterpieces.

There are so many AI detectors and most of them are not 100% reliable this is why it is good to use more than one to check a writing. However, until we have standard AI detectors that are acceptable by the majority to be reliable we will keep having these accusations. But you don't have to be worried if your works are written by you. Enjoy the forum.

That's an extremely significant point.
Differences in vocabulary and writing style may definitely tell us if an AI or a human wrote a post. It's also critical to take into account the post's context and the community in which it was written.
In one society, a post that appears inappropriate or overly polished may be perfectly acceptable in another, wouldn't you agree?

Sadly, I find it difficult to write something short. It feels odd and weird. At the same time, I still feel that most members won't appreciate long form of content. I noticed that most users usually write about something that we can easily or probably must have read about somewhere. They even go as far as asking questions that regular search engines can provide answers to.

Though, I clearly understand the fact that every user is trying to checkmate the system, but I also suggest that appropriate tools/procedures should be in place in checkmating. False accusation and assumption shouldn't be the number one option. Even SEC finds evidence before taking someone to court.

And that, OP, is the truth.  Maybe that's why you were suspected so quickly of using AI to make a post.  If you haven't been a member here long enough to know how motivated people are to post for money, you wouldn't necessarily know how bad the situation is or how long it's been going on for.  Most newcomers who try to write in English have a very poor grasp of the language, and if one makes a post that's akin to a blog entry with above-average English it's a red flag.  Like Rikafip said, it's sad but it's true.

It could be because most of their posts are in Off-Topic, and maybe moderators are slow to notice or take action there. Nevertheless, these posts should absolutely be deleted as AI spam. Perhaps they will get around to it shortly.

There's nothing to consider here. The OP doesn't have any posts that would qualify as AI-written. I also checked all his posts several times. The manner of presentation is similar to some phrases that AI often uses, but we must first see the person and then understand that the AI was created by frequently used words in human speech.
OP, there is a thread where users complain about posts written by AI.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ai-spam-report-reference-thread-5456516

As you can see, not a single post of yours is there, and this does not mean that you were simply not noticed.

Moderators don't always delete AI posts. Just look at this account; it looks like nothing will stop him from using AI. And the moderators simply turn a blind eye.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/ravichnadra-3590890

First, this forum adopt freedom of speech, anyone can say anything and their post won't be deleted.
Second, grow your skin thicker, you can't control what people will say to you.
Third, if you don't want to see criticism, click ignore below their account.

Most of the times AI posts would be deleted, I've report your post, so let's see the decision by moderator.

I agree with you Bro if he is doing great on other platforms and he wants to take his skill and his work here, there is no need to change the style of his writing as long as he is aware of all the rules and he is not violating any there is no need to change his style just to please some members of the community, if OP is good and clean he should keep up and do not be discouraged.

I don't agree with that. He has done nothing wrong, therefore he can write the posts as he pleases, long or short. Earning trust has nothing to do with how he writes the posts.