Topic: Shouldn't there be a forum rule against obvious AI-generated content? (Read 1215 times)

I don't think moderators are leaving cases where it can be proven that someone used an AI bot to write a post unmoderated. The information from this thread already shows that the staff is deleting such posts. The consequences we aren't seeing are bans for users who post AI-generated content. At least not on a wide scale.

Very little if you ask me. If I felt like talking to bots, I would do that and not be on Bitcointalk. I would much rather speak to real people and understand what they think of different ideas and concepts.

I reported him to Hhampuz yesterday, and he removed him from his campaign with immediate effect as soon as he saw my PM.



He also posted an apology in the thread where he was reported for plagiarism which I showed above but he did it by saying that he didn't want to use AI to generate and make posts but he was using it for translation and AI added extra stuff itself in the translations, lol.

What kind of person would get something done and then don't check if it is done in the correct way or not? He probably thinks we are all dumb or something by making such excuses for what he did. 

This cheater is so stupid and frankly deserves to be punished accordingly. Can't stand such people. I'm pretty sure no signature campaign manager would tolerate such blatant plagiarism and abuse of LLM content, especially not @Hhampuz.

It can't be categorized as spam because spam is different. A spam is a post or text that doesn't have any meaning, value, or constructiveness in it whereas AI-generated content tends to have meaning and usually is on-topic as well if the user knows how to use it properly. It falls more under the category of plagiarism than spam.


It's understandable, that the decreasing activity metrics might be a bit concerning, but is that enough reason to leave certain cases unmoderated? Wouldn't that make things worse? I wonder what value a user brings to this forum who knows nothing more than copying content from elsewhere and posting it in the forum as their own whether it's taken from an AI model or somewhere from the internet.

I don't know but in my opinion, less activity but a cleaner forum is much better than more activity but a forum full of spammers, plagiarizers, and AI shitposters.

---

This is what I mean when I say "obvious" AI-generated content:


The original post is still not deleted but he has removed the part highlighted in the report above.

What's surprising is that the user in question, Sg4j1n3ll0, is a participant of Duelbits Signature Campaign managed by Hhampuz:



So basically, he is not only doing a very bad thing by posting AI-generated content and passing it on as his own, but he is also cheating a signature campaign and getting paid for it.

Should this be tolerated or ignored only because it might reduce forum activity if he gets punished? I don't think so.

Moderators and admins might have become more lenient towards banning plagiarized content altogether. We don't know. They are not going to tell us that they will be tolerating some cases of plagiarism. Why do I think that?

Two reasons:
1. The forum isn't as active as it was in the past. Issuing more bans will only decrease the activity further. 
2. I see no ban appeal threads in Meta dating back to mid-August. Usually, there are at least a few. I only checked using the keyword "appeal."

The forum isn’t one that changes easily and quickly. Before any chnage is been made on the forum although, the sort you are asking isn’t exactly a change but, an update on specifics with regards to rules and developments on the forum.
However, though AI generated content is hardly regarded as plagiarized content, it’s agreeable that they lack originality and don’t relay the opinion of the user. Hence, this counts as spam and could be treated in the same way.

Spams do get deletes accompanied with temp bans in serious cases and after some series of these temp bans, the sword is allowed to swing.

AI-generated content should be reported immediately without a delay, this to me is an advanced way of plagiarism, which is a bit difficult to detect. Practically, this is you claiming to be better than what that you are not really are. Well, in other hands, the victims aren't doing themselves that good as overtime you may become dump, can't become a better version of yourself, it means you can't think outside the box ,and offer something from your inner-self

Exactly. Users who are not banned for posting AI-generated content might take advantage of the fact that moderators are lenient with it and that there is no official rule against it which shouldn't be the case, in my opinion. If plagiarism is punishable, proven AI-content plagiarizers should be punished as well.


It's true, that you can't provide much evidence for AI-generated content because you can't match the post with the content just like how we do with plagiarism because the content is only accessible by the user who generated it, however, if there is clear cut cases where it is very easy to understand that a user is posting AI-generated content again and again, they should get some treatment for it.


That would do, I guess. Even if there is no separate rule for it, having it mentioned in the official rules should be enough for it to be imposed and acted upon when needed.

That's right, as long as AI-generated posts that get reported are deleted by moderators we don't actually have to care about it being a unofficial rule. I'm pretty sure that admins aren't adding it as a rule because in future things will change a lot and there's chance that AI will continue to get improve overtime.

The tools that detect AI content may not be able to detect the content when AI gets more smart and mimics human writing perfectly. We all know that AI content is just plagiarized content and there's actually an unofficial rule against plagiarized content and that's enough to report such posts and so far whenever I've reported any such posts they were deleted by admins/moderators within few minutes to hours and that's a good thing.

I don't find it OK to only delete AI-content that has been presented as own. For me this is plagarism and as such it is supposed to be not tolerated in this forum. The rules for plagarism abuse are there and pretty much clear.

Providing hard evidence for copy/pasted AI-content without proper labelling might be more complicated than simple copy/pastes from "normal" online content. But I would expect same outcome once properly "found and proven guilty" as you say.

Thinking about it again, this forum probably doesn't need a specific rule targeting copy/pasting AI-content, though it wouldn't hurt. The plagarism rule could have an additional sentence clarifying that AI-content without proper labelling it as such is considered to be plagarism, too.

@dkbit98
You are right. I hadn't noticed that the admins actually added a new rule that prohibits the promotion and linking to mixing sites. I went to check after seeing your reply, and it's there towards the bottom.

That shows that they are still making officially unofficial changes to the forum rules when needed. There is no mention of AI-content still. To me, it fits perfectly under rule #33 that prohibits copying content from other sources and websites. AI-generated content is something you copy from an external source/website to paste here and pretend it's your own.

Is it okay if a person is found guilty of plagiarism but as a punishment, only his plagiarized posts are removed and he is left to keep doing that? I have said this repeatedly in this thread, I understand that AI-generated posts are removed, and that is great, but if there is no official rule about it and if it falls under the rule about plagiarism, and if users who get either temporary or permanent ban for plagiarism, the same thing should apply for AI content posters if they are found or proven guilty of it.


It's not only about punctuation marks or correct grammar, there is a pattern most AI models use to generate texts. I use tools such as Grammarly as well to find mistakes in what I write so that I don't have mistakes, but that doesn't make my posts look like they have been generated using an AI model because there will always be a difference in content that you write yourself and rectify using a tool and content that you generate using a tool.

Until they start charging for all AI generating services, and believe me they will do it soon

I agree, and rules can easily be changed, look how quickly they added latest mixer ban rule.
Like I said, use of AI generated tools is fine for me, but only if use of this tools is correctly mentioned.

Plagiarism rule can be applied for AI-generated posts and without any new rule, it's fine with current existing rule for plagiarism.

The content is more important than mistakes in commas, grammatical errors. AI-generated content can be very generic and is not relevant to a discussion but AI usually used by these people to create topics, than normal posts inside a thread.

Do careful checks by ourselves or can use support from Grammarly or AI or similar tools, it's good. Having mistakes in a post is not too good and if we can sharpen our posts with better grammar, more relevant words, it's better.

This use is not plagiarism and corrected contents by Grammarly, AI will be different than contents completely created by AI.

As long as the admins delete AI-generated posts, I don't really care if we have a new unofficial rule added to the list of other unofficially official rules. It's plagiarism, and we already have a rule against plagiarised content.

Someone said you can recognize AI content by the lack of mistakes, commas, and/or grammatical errors. I think it's dangerous to use that as an argument.

I try to pay close attention to how I write my responses and I am sure there are others just like me. People shouldn't have to answer to anyone why there are no or very little mistakes in their forum posts. It's because we try to avoid making mistakes, that's why.

Lazy rich kids always had this possibility: they could pay someone to write their thesis. Now lazy poor kids can do the same.

I know what you mean, so don't worry.
I am just giving an example that content written by AI is not always bad when the information contained in it is correct and valid. But unfortunately, some users don't want to admit that they use AI to post. So again, don't worry because I get what you have been trying to explain.

Bro, we are talking about people using AI-generated content as their own. I don't want to repeat myself again and again, so please read the previous posts in this thread for a better understanding of the context and my post you quoted.

Not always agree. AI content that can be confirmed based on data and facts is also better if you know how to use it. Use quotes and tell everyone that what you are quoting is information gathered by the AI ​​instead of hiding everything as if it were yours. Typo errors made by native English speakers are understandable, but misleading information is also unacceptable.


Here is one example:

When and where did I say using AI or other tools to rectify your mistakes is an offense or should be treated as one? I use Grammarly myself, you can check my post history. Do you think I sound like I'm using an AI to write my posts?

There is a difference between AI-generated posts and posts that have been corrected using AI or tools such as Grammarly. And, this agenda isn't against people who are good in writing English, it's about people using AI and the patterns I have discussed in the opening post refer to that and not to native English speakers.


Just for your reference, I earlier defended a guy for writing original posts but having mistakes in his posts. This proves that I'm never against people who make grammar or spelling mistakes or even words they use as long as I can understand what they are trying to say. I believe that a person who writes original content with mistakes is much better than someone who posts perfect content but generates it using AI or copies it from others.

Lazy rich kids literally don't have to pay anymore for someone else to write their thesis anymore  
I don't understand how some people think this is not considered cheating, but I see more tools are being developed to detect AI generate content.
It is cat and mouse game.

One good use of AI tools is ability to translate something from foreign languages and create new audio recording from that.
Even same voice can be used if original audio record in long enough.
Foe example Kaiser Wilhelm II English AI reconstruction:
https://youtu.be/FvFNPYuM8Ps

They can use it as their reason for their stolen content but it's not true.

I used Grammarly in the past, and I knew that it won't change your content 100%. Otherwise, Grammarly only gives you some suggestions and never entirely change your content with any extreme suggestion like this.

I don't use AI to generate content or to check grammar, but I believe they operate not too different than Grammarly in checking grammar, words and correct mistakes.

Generally using a machine tool to generate content is completely different than using a tool to check and fix mistakes in grammar or vocabulary usages.

Anytime someone gets caught using AI to write a significant amount of their posts always claims that they are only using Grammarly to fix their mistakes and improve their vocabulary. I’m sure most people are being honest but sometimes I will come across posts where people don’t seem to have a good understanding of the topic they are discussing and it is clear that they are taking things a step further and are using AI for more than basic assistance.

I understand the appeal of wanting to be more efficient with our time and being able to communicate clearly but there has to be a limit where it is considered a misuse of these tools. A permanent ban seems too harsh but I still think something besides simply deleting a few posts is necessary to discourage excessive use of AI.

That's true. If you feel your written English is not good, and want to improve it, you can use grammar checking tool, AI tools, to improve your post quality in grammar and vocabularies, but that's it.

The core idea for your post is from your brain, and its structure, words are mostly from your brain. Grammarly or AI tools only help you to correct grammar mistakes and use more relevant vocabularies, but it won't change the main content of yours. It means your post content is actually yours and your post won't be red flagged as AI-genrated post.

It is annoying and it's up to these people to improve their written English, to communicate better with other forum members.

They can use whatever tools that are helpful for them to learn Writing and sharpen their Writing skills, including Grammarly, AI etc.

OP, some users are well-professional writers or they come from countries with good English and writing. Yes, anyone who plagiarised or used AI to generate responses should be punished. But some make use of AI to correct spelling errors, place punctuation marks, commas, or full atop where necessary, and other assistance in writing is not an offense. I know that ost people use grammar as a tool to help them write good English. Do you consider that to be cheating?

It's annoying if someone writes in terrible English and posts, members will complain, and if the Engish is clean and excellent members still will complain. Then what do we expect from ourselves?

As long as you are posting that’s not originally yours, then it will still fall to plagiarism, irrespective if it’s partial or the whole part. And the forum is very clear that plagiarism seriously is breaking the forum’s rule. Same with this AI generated content, you are not originally the source of your post, so it will still fall to plagiarism, something that should always be avoided if you want to build your own reputation and credibility within the forum.

That's like using the software for proofreading, instead of having a human do it. When I was writing my thesis, I asked someone to proofread it and use a red marker an anything that needed my attention. A piece of software may be able to do that for grammar, but it won't be able to do that for anything more serious than that (such as interpreting data incorrectly).

I'd never do this though: I wouldn't want some software company to use my work to train it's software. It's bad enough they already use anything I've ever posted online without my consent.

University professors are getting pissed off at the use of ChatGPT for thesis creation:



He brings up some good points on the subject; here are some relevant snippets:


It is worth differentiating ChatGPT users:

 - those using ChatGPT to enhance their output, vs
 - those using ChatGPT to replace their output.

I'm fine with people using it to fix grammar & spelling errors, but not OK with it when used to generate non-substantive blather (aka spam).

I think the reason why there's no specific forum rule to address AI content has to do with fool-proof detection and hard enough evidence. If someone just copy/pastes and plagiarizes it's easy to convict.

I don't have experience with AI content detectors and how well they actually work. (Side question: have those AI content detectors been scientifically well checked?)

What threshold do you want to apply to convict someone of plagarizing with or using AI content? How many decent detectors should flag suspected content as AI diarrhea? Who defines what a decent AI detector is?

My personal opinion is that any AI-generated content should be clearly designated as such, no exception. Omission of this designation should be punishable^[1]. I'm not interested to read any diarrhea of large language models and particularly not when posters make it up as their own stuff.

Computer aided language translation is a different thing and by itself usually no plagiarism.

My proposal for a forum rule would therefore be:
Any AI-generated or large language model content has to be designated as such, no exception allowed. Failure to designate such content will result in temporary bans when convicted. After three increasingly temporary bans the next ban is permanent.


[1] I would be fine with increasingly temporary bans for first few occurances and finally a permaban when the suspect doesn't learn and improve.

Usually, when you use Google Translate, the text wouldn't be too good to be detected as AI-generated because Google Translate sucks most of the time, however, if you use an AI model, that might happen. But, there will always be a slight difference between a text that has been translated and a text that has been generated. I have explained some patterns that AI models use when generating textual content. Mostly, with translated texts, not all of those things will be present.

Besides, I have mentioned that we are talking about obvious cases, cases where it's obvious that a user is using an AI model to generate the posts they are making in the forum, this could be based on the results of AI detection tools or their post history where they might have not yet started using an AI to generate posts.

There can be exceptions in moderation in cases where there is no convincing evidence about a user being reported for using AI-generated content.

They may not be doing this, not for lack of rules, but for lack of evidence.

I can use Google Translate to write here. Or I can write to an IA and ask him to translate it into perfect English. This is not plagiarism.

Plagiarism, would be you asking "what is Bitcoin?", and I go to IA to write the question and ask him to answer, and then I post the answer here.

The problem now is, which of the two scenarios did I use? Did I write and translate or ask to write?

I believe the reason why mods aren't banning users for making AI posts is obvious, they don't consider this to be a rule-breaking offense because we don't have an official rule about it yet. So when you report AI-generated posts, the posts get deleted but the users are left without any punishment, that is at least what I have noticed so far and that is the reason why I created this thread.

I have also reported a lot of AI-generated content, most of them were deleted, some unhandled, but I have not seen users getting nuked for it. If a mod comments about it here that would make things more clear. If they consider this plagiarism, there should be a punishment for it, if they don't, there should be a separate rule for it.

I’ve noticed an increase in AI-generated posts. It is not just newbies that are doing it, but also established members who are active in paid signature campaigns. I’ve submitted reports in the AI spam reporting thread but it didn’t seem worth the effort to continue investigating and making reports. Some of the more annoying spammers do get banned but moderators are lenient enough that AI spam is still rampant.

It is the same as plagiarism since the one who posted it isn't the one who write it or who made it so it is possible to consider it as plagiarism although the data isn't taken from somewhere else so i'd say it is a partial plagiarism and not plagiarism at the same time. Since it is like that then it should just be considered as spam. Also, people would have to check it to see if it is AI generated or not at all. For punishment, I think restricting an account to post for a certain amount of time like unable to post for 1 day as an example.

That's the basic way to detect that a post has been generated through an AI model. You can't expect someone having broken English in their previous posts which they possibly wrote themselves to become a completely perfect English writer in their latter posts which makes you realize that there is something wrong. The AI uses perfect punctuation, sentence starters as I mentioned in the OP, and most importantly, perfect grammar. Even a native speaker might make mistakes sometimes but AI doesn't, and that makes it easy to detect unless someone edits the text after generating it but those who can't write a few sentences themselves would barely have enough brain to do this.


That's why I suggested there should be an official rule about it, and if there isn't and AI content falls under plagiarism, the culprits should get the same punishment as plagiarizers.


I do, every day, but you know what? Discussion boards are worse than that. Bitcoin Discussion is still better, but Altcoin Discussion is so full of spam and spammers that if you report one post, two more are posted.

Yes, yes, a thousand times YES.

Members using AI to make posts should be permabanned just like they would if they plagiarized something.  And I know there are tools to detect AI usage, but I don't know how to use them and frankly I don't have the patience to scrutinize every post I think was generated or assisted by AI.  OP's example is pretty convincing, but every time I see a Newbie or Jr. Member either creating threads or just making posts in impeccable English, all the alarm bells go off in my head because I know such a phenomenon was almost unheard of prior to idiots gaining access to AI tools.  In other words, most new members' first language isn't English (and it's probably not even in the top five) and hasn't been for years.

The reason I think the punishment should be so harsh is that if this shit isn't nipped in the bud, bitcointalk is going to turn into a forum consisting of bots talking nonsense to each other and will have a flood of threads with moronic topics in which the OP doesn't really say much of anything.

Actually, has anyone checked out the Economics section lately?  Armageddon might have already arrived.

You have said it all, that AI rules should be under or considered as plagiarism, And many persons I have come across their cases concerning AI has been treating same way as plagiarised post is been treated..I have not seen any value why someone will put in quote of what it extracted with AI and post in the forum, since the post will look as low value post, i don't think it's needful, the only thing is that anyone that's been caught with AI post should face the consequences by the mods [ban he/her acct] and i think that will limit the rate of using artificial intelligent for forum, if many accts is been brought down, people will desist  using AI.

It's true, using open source really allows you to do whatever you want with it, even if it means taking it as it is being sold.

I went to ask ChatGPT if it was considered plagiarism, using AI code in projects, and after a "conversation" he highlighted:
"1. AI-Generated Code is Original - AI-generated code is not a direct copy of other existing code unless it is explicitly asked to replicate something specific.
2. AI Acts as a Tool - Using AI to create code is similar to using other software development tools, such as frameworks, libraries, and code generators.
3. User Control and Supervision - The user has control over the generated code, guiding the process and refining solutions as needed. You are responsible for the logic, structure and final implementation, which means the end result is a co-creation under your direction. The final code is the result of your decisions and adjustments, with the AI ​​serving as a technical assistant."

I think point 3 is the key point in this issue. If the idea, supervision, guidance, analysis, adjustments are made by the person, then the final result belongs to that person.


But this logic can no longer be applied to the written text, without modifications. In the same "conversation", I asked what it would be like in the case of texts and the answer was:
"If you use an AI like ChatGPT to create text and submit it without modifications or without indicating that it was generated by an AI, the concept of plagiarism may apply depending on the context."


In short, using source code via AI is very different from using text.

Not specifically, only if you ask it for that. When you use a prompt to generate something (textual) from an AI model, the idea is yours, not the content.

What Grammarly or other tools do is correct your mistakes, for example, if I write, "He have a good sense of humor.", now, there is a mistake in my sentence, I'm supposed to use "has" with "He" because it's a third person singular and based on English grammar rules, we are supposed to use "has" with third person singular. Grammarly will show me the mistakes in my sentences and help me correct them. In this case, the written content is my own, but it's just helping me have no mistakes in it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with using AI to rectify your mistakes or help you write your sentences in correct grammar. If a user is writing the content and then using an AI to correct the mistakes, there is nothing wrong with it, but if someone is generating the whole content using an AI model, and then passing it on as their own, that is wrong.

I checked The MIT License, which is used by Bitcoin Core, and indeed, it only requires to include the License, not the credits. I didn't expect that.

Open source code, which most of these packages are, give you full rights to edit without credit.

That is true.

But for a programmer to say that was simply ruining his career, because saying that he did something that in reality he is not capable of doing, is not very positive. It's better to say that you used a certain tool and receive credit for knowing how to use it very well, than in the end losing all credibility.

If the code you use, edit and publish doesn't require to credit the original author, that's fine when it comes to copyright laws. But if you pretend you wrote all of it, it's still plagiarism.

That's what AI does too.   The content is originally mine, it's just fixing it for me.

I sometimes use similar tools like grammerly, quilbot (mostly) or a typewriter, when I'm writing a long post. (You know, just to make sure that there are no grammatical or punctual errors. ). Does that makes my post a plagiarism? Umm, I don't think so. The content was originally mine, I just fixed it. 

afaik, if you are not the original author and don't mention the source, it will be plagiarism. AI is basically giving you content that you never wrote, and people are just using it as their own. So it's plagiarism. 

Lolz😃.. You actually sounds funny.


But however, using an A.I generated content is one thing that shouldn't be frown at, as it adds no value to forum discussion, since they are not genuine and coming from a user who has got experience, but simply robot. And as such, just as many people suggested, it's punishment should be treated just like that of "plagiarism" with a temporary or permanent banned, whereas if the account seems to have been of higher rank, you just red-tag the account with (i.e negative Trust), so as not to be able to partake in signature campaign ever again.

In programming things will be a little different.

First, as mentioned, a lot of content can be developed based on Open Source code. Some of this code requires credits to be given, others do not.

Second, the code generated by AI is public code, that is, no one can demand exclusivity. So, in certain cases it will be the same as using public code libraries. It is then up to whoever uses this code to validate, verify and analyze whether everything will be correct and functional. In the end, several details must be evaluated to understand whether or not the script can be considered yours.

One thing is certain, even the code generated by AI does not invalidate not having programming knowledge, otherwise you are exposed to many bugs.

Writing a text, 100% by AI, is something completely different. Because you don't need any specific level of knowledge for everything to "work".

Okay, let me ask you a question. If I read some information over the internet, I memorize it, and then I rewrite that information somewhere else with the same meaning but different wording, etc. Will that be plagiarism? I don't think so. The AI models do the same thing. They don't copy and paste exact words or sentences from other sources, they take information from the data that is fed to them, process that information, create a different version of it, and give it to you as a user asking for it.

The point is, that if you, as a user, take that information from ChatGPT and then post it as your own, you are doing a wrong thing because it's not your work.

There is one more thing. Experiment with ChatGPT just for reference. Create a prompt that would generate some text about anything you want, and use the same prompt with two different accounts or on two different devices. You will see that the answer might be the same by meaning but it won't be the exact same by wording.


What about the ones that are reported in threads with proofs and everything? If it's about AI-detecting websites or applications that mods might think aren't accurate, one can be wrong, if multiple detectors are giving the same results, that should prove it.


Hey, you are probably confused about this, but let me tell you, the word "unofficial" in the title of Unofficial list of (official) Bitcointalk.org rules, guidelines, FAQ thread is an adjective used for the word "list". So it's basically saying that the list is unofficial but it's for the official (you can see it written in brackets in the title) forum rules.  

You mean you want an official rule for AI-generated content when the forum itself does not have an official rule that governs anything but unofficial ones? Regardless, I believe there is a reason for that, nevertheless, it's a good call to distinctively define the forum's view on AI-generated content.

For me, I am confused about this and might be the reason why the forum is silent about it after many reports about it. AI is being used in this advanced age where even reputable companies and educational sectors are mastering its work. Are they not? So, to take a side here is so technical. It's good that moderators have been doing a great job about it at their discretion and it's our duty to report more of such content that we suspect and give moderators the benefit of the judgmental doubt to deliver the right verdict.

I am humbled that the industry is spending billions to help me.  My left fingers are slow, and I can copy/paste much faster than typing. 

This bots are not inventing that from thin air, they are using copy-pasting and combining what other human being wrote before in different websites.
Basically all AI bots are doing the same thing as a human who is doing plagiarism but than makes little changes and mistakes to make it more human-like and harder to detect for plagiarism.

Because it's not always easy to detect them with high percentage of accuracy.

Maybe only for people who are lazy and can't use their brain for thinking and fingers for typing.
If those AI bots open their source code you would found written source of every sentence and word written and copied from human beings.

I don't believe that these websites are plagiarizing anything, even if they don't credit the thousands of authors on each project.    They are not changing the code, just using it.

One thing is for sure - the lawyers will make their money on changing terms alone.   Next time my word processor suggests "you are" instead of "your", I don't want to have to credit the software, or the people that wrote it.   

I think it's also worth asking why they don't ban those who have plagiarism found, and it doesn't relate to AI. And only after that can we start talking about a complete ban on those who use AI to create posts.
Probably because the number of users on the forum is not increasing, the moderators are protecting everyone, hoping that people will respect the forum rules.

I know members will be reporting AI-generated content and the users being reported should get some punishment along with deleting their posts.


About plagiarism, I don't think a user is banned if it's proven that they have been involved in plagiarism, but when it comes to AI-generated content, users aren't getting banned, only the posts are deleted. What you said about traffic doesn't make any sense because you wouldn't let people keep breaking the rules only because you don't want to lose some traffic.


I understand, I know that AI-generated content is plagiarism but it's plagiarism on the part of the bot providing that content, and the reason why I believe it's wrong to use those texts as someone's own is because they are not referencing that they have used an AI model or a bot to generate that. If I use ChatGPT to generate a code or anything, and I mention that I have used ChatGPT to do this, it shouldn't be a problem, but if I don't do that, it means I'm trying to use that thing as my own and that is wrong. I understand it's plagiarism of a sort, but we currently don't have strict rules regarding it, hence this thread.

Those who say AI-generated content falls under the plagiarism rule in the forum rules list, I want to ask them the same question asked by LoyceV earlier. Why aren't users who are reported with evidence getting banned? If someone is found guilty of plagiarism and there is a rule against it, the person should get punished for that. Having their posts deleted and leaving them to keep doing what they have been doing isn't how it should be dealt with if it falls under a forum rule and they are breaking it again and again.

As an example, you can look at the post history of this guy, it's the same user that I referenced in the OP. I reported some posts from this user yesterday, all of them were AI-generated, and both I and LoyceV, reported him in the AI Spam Report Reference Thread but I upon checking his post history again today, I can see that the posts reported have been deleted but he did a few again after that, without getting any punishment for it. Why?

If this falls under plagiarism, the punishment should be the same for it, and if it doesn't, there should be a separate rule and punishment for it. That is the basic reason why I started this thread.

It is quite easy to determine with 100% certainty that someone has plagiarized because you have the user's post and the source from which the content was copied - noting that there were cases where some users copied their content from blogs or other forums without citing the source, which then it's definitely not plagiarism if they can prove it.

On the other hand, you have a lot of AI detectors, some of which are very bad and give a lot of false detections, which is why I accused one forum user of using AI, which was not the case. Therefore, one should be careful when using such tools and always use at least three reliable tools before making a final conclusion.

I think that the mods are very careful in the case of AI reports, because there is a possibility that someone will be permanently banned due to bad detection, and that's why you need more evidence that someone is really using AI in order to get a permanent ban.

I would personally try to influence all members (personally new ones) with a clear message that the use of AI can lead them into problems and that they should think twice about using it on the forum. Of course, there are users who use AI to create images and that's perfectly OK and can be fun, as is the case in WO sometimes.

I'll show you an example. OP, you are misinterpreting your guesses about where the AI texts come from. And when we see this kind of behavior, where there are a lot of similar phrases torn out of a million articles on the Internet and collected together in another, next answer, it still does not belong to the person who copied and pasted it.
And yes, such posts can be seen not only by those who use AI, but also by those who often check such posts.
Just answer, can this post not be considered plagiarism when the tool shows other sources from which the sentences were torn out?

It's text written by someone (or something) else while the user pretends he wrote it by himself. That's plagiarism by definition.
The "AI" tool itself is highly debatable too: I've seen many accusations of them using unlicensed input data to train it, and they don't credit the real authors.

If by "the forum" you mean theymos, I don't think he cares about the amount of traffic. If anything, low-quality traffic isn't worth much.

It's probably still plagiarism, but from ChatGPT. They take bits and pieces of other people's work without crediting anyone.

Some even earn Merit, but I'm much more disappointed by the number of people responding to them. Even on the tech board: what's the point of responding to a made-up problem?

Oh, the definition card.   I trump that with the details card:  An AI does not have thoughts.   AI is a tool much like Grammarly or a typewriter.

(forgive the sarcasm, you know I love you)

The chatbot AI users never credit their posts to ChatGPT or other AIs because they intend to steal contents created by ChatGPT, AI and make it like their own content.

If they are in a campaign, campaign manager will not pay for posts credited to ChatGPT, AI.
If they are newbies, forum members will not merit these posts if there is credit to ChatGPT, AI.

Intention of ChatGPT, AI users is clear, and they don't forget to add credit but they want to hide source of the content.

So it's plagiarism.

They can use AI generated images in their posts for fun, like memes, but if they use these images for their participation in art contests, it's not acceptable.

I disagree. Let's look at the definition:


I don't care if people post AI generated images (unless they are extremely bad to the point of being offensive). I doubt most other people care either. It would be tacky for the person posting the image to say "I made this using my own brain," or imply something similar.

Let's say for instance someone designing a series of Bitcoin collectibles uses AI-generated images to "showcase their work." Its not their work at all -- it doesn't even exist. This would not be a particularly trust-inspiring act. Its all about the context in which AI-generated material is being used. If its being used to meet shitpost quotas, I'm against it.

Because the forum don't want to lose more traffic, not all reports in plagiarism are taken action by moderators, only the posts are being deleted, while the users didn't get banned. So, this might be the reason why all users that use AI didn't get banned.

There are no rules in this forum the developers will be banned for committing code plagiarism.

What I know there's a license to protect digital property, so the authors can sue them for breaching the license.

But AI is not plagiarism.  

AI is a tool that many people here use to generate text.    Could be because they are lazy, or aren't native to the language.  

Consider a user who watches a bitcoin story and has a great political cartoon idea.   He/She can't draw worth shit, so he describes the idea to AI.   He then posts the image here and starts a passionate discussion about a novel idea.  Why is that punishable?

Did you know that websites like BPIP, Nintastic, ImgTalk, etc all use plagiarised code?   It's legal in the form of "packages", so why shouldn't AI content be legal as well?


So each of the websites above should list all authors of each open source package they use or be banned? 

This is a good point. Only some of them are getting banned. It seems we're at the point where most regular forum members have moved away from trying to use AI (except for in the Gambling section) and now the only ones who do it are newbie bots and promoters of projects. If a newbie just writes a bunch of spam posts right off the bat, they usually get banned; same thing should apply to AI spammers.

I'm thinking about how much AI spam there might be right now if I hadn't started my thread 

Why I think the mods use the hammer on users who are engage in the use of AI is that allowing AI to thrive in this forum defeats the core purpose of the forum which I guess is a place of organic discussion of Bitcoin, Blockchain technology and every other thing that is connected to the digital economy. Allowing AI kills the originality requirements and will make here to be heavily infested with bots, the consequence of which will be that no one will take the forum seriously. So, I love the approach adopted by the mods regarding the use of AI in a forum like ours.

OP didn't  show the username but showed the id
OP's Suspect=> Princeeibn

Generally I think once a post uses a chat bot to generate a reply  for a post or let's just say Ai generated text as you've  said , there's no how it won't plagiarise because it uses available  resources to answer your question  and that's gonna plagiarise someone's content nmw. Now detecting it sometimes could be tricky.... because you see some similar word  expressions in a post doesn't really means it's AI generated though  the user above could  have  used an Ai for his/her  content.
Thus even if the rule is  been created(apart from the plagiarism), the content still needs to be reported and the  decisions will still have to be carried out by mod.

Not get banned because mods not seeing AI contents as plagiarism? Now, I get why OP started this discussion. You nailed it @LoyceV .

Not only because there's no accurate AI detection tool. I believe that theymos doesn't want to enforce a rule yet, this might be because AI is pretty much new and could develop to something better than spammers using it to generate posts in the forum. Making a rule against it might later contradict the forum in the future or impede the exploration of the technology.

However, even without admin's intervention, forum members have started fighting AI spammers, but it's not going to be an easy war. But in the end, people can't stop using AI to generate posts in the forum. It's better we starting learning how to accommodate it as part of forum happenings just like plagerism.

Not only the obvious ones, all AI verbal diarrhea should be banned. From the forum, but even better if it's banned from the internet.

All the more reason to ban it all. If the user doesn't use a chatbot to create some text to pretend he wrote it, he doesn't have to worry about being obvious or not.

Agreed. But why don't they all get banned instantly?

If he does not know, he can learn and now is the time for it.

• [Guide] Searching effectively
• theymos explained about forum search with some guides, days ago.

No offense, but you are already an old member of the forum and you should know how to find a topic, and especially you should know that such a topic is probably in the Reputation board.

Regarding your question, I think that it should definitely be added to the unofficial rules of the forum the rule about AI, because it is obvious that too many users of this forum think that using the same thing is completely normal, which means that the forum is increasingly under the attack of AI spammers against whom less than 10 members are fighting on the entire forum.

Clear rules and strict penalties if it is proven beyond doubt that someone is using AI for their posts are the only thing that can prevent such behavior.

Thank you for this. I looked but couldn't find the thread, I guess I was looking in the wrong section for it. If I had found it earlier, I would have been able to report the guy before LoyceV, I guess.  



At least users who are posting obvious AI-generated content should get punished for it. Even if they don't want to, mods will have to depend on external tools in this case because that is the only way it can be proved that these plagiarizers are doing the wrong thing.

Plagiarism definition in the forum is not the same as in academic space. The definition on plagiarism can be universal or local and you can see Bitcoin forum is a strictest forum against plagiarism in comparison with other cryptocurrency forums.

It is case to case basis, and with my experience here, it's time to time basis too. What is time to time basis?

Punishment on plagiarism can be different at different times, sometimes it was nothing (forum did not care about it), sometimes it was strict, sometimes there is second chance but strict reviews, sometimes second of second chances, and sometimes a poster must make dozens of plagiarized posts to be banned.

I agree that people who post AI content should be banned for plagiarism, but i believe mods don't want to start banning people for it because some of the AI detection tools give false positives if you run a post through them.

I'm aware that there are certain tools that give "accurate" results if a post is generated by AI or not, but maybe mods don't want to solely depend on these "external" tools to ban users on the forum, because it will prolly create a lot of drama with users claiming that the tools were wrong about their posts.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, "Plagiarism is the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own"
From this definition, we can say that posting an AI-generated post is plagiarism because they took a work that's not theirs and posted it as theirs. It's no different from taking content on the internet and posting it as mine. Someone or something else wrote that, so if you must use it, you have to reference where it came from.

So I think the forum is right to classify AI-generated posts that are without referring as plagiarism and award the same punishment to all parties.
To me, it's even easier to spot an AI-generated post. I've reported more AI-generated posts than I have reported a plagiarised post from another website or article. Once those kinds of posts as reported and they are confirmed, they're deleted immediately.

If you copy and paste a content for any source, but you don't announce the source link, it's plagiarism.

AI-generated, or human-generated, it's the same because if you are not an original author of the content, you plagiarized.

Since last two years, many discussions and proposals against AI.
This forum will need explicit rules on the use of AI.
AI-generated post discussion thread: how to identify & report
AI generated content by newbies
Plagiarism vs AI Posting
What's AI Written Post?

Report any AI-generated post to
AI Spam Report Reference Thread

You can use that argument to say that you can't prove with 100% certainty that someone uses AI bot as well which would then make the rule against AI generated content useless.

As others said, plagiarism rule covers this nicely, but unfortunately mods are less leniant to ban people over that type of plagiarism (some would say for any type of plagiarism as well). At least for now.

Hey @Alone055 you should go to this thread and post the one I'm referring to you can't find it right now. AI Spam Report Reference Thread The member you refer to here have already discussed those posts on the AI Spam Report Reference Thread. Even that member has been given a neutral tag.

I think this will ease the burden of moderators. A user's 200 posts being reported and deleted by a moderator will increase their burden but if the same user gets banned or restricted for breaking a rule within the first 10 to 20 reported posts, that makes it easier for them.


I know what plagiarism is, and I know it's technically plagiarism, but I said it's not provable or clear plagiarism because you can't find concrete evidence for it since the content generated is only available to that specific user and no one else, so if you report it as plagiarism, you can't prove it, technically.

Do you understand what plagiarism is? You plagiarize when you make someone's or something's content appear as if it were your own. If you deliberately omit the source of presented content when it isn't yours, you plagiarize.

Doesn't matter if its a bot or copied from a website or chatbot prompt output. Doesn't matter if you have a browser extension that talks to ChatGPT or whatever behind the scenes. If it generates text that you wouldn't have come up on your own, it's not your content. Don't make it look like it is your own content, to be safe always provide a source reference.

Maybe idea of ​​the rule of not being allowed to use AI is valid, but AI artificial intelligence chatbot technology is very difficult to eliminate. To overcome the problem of cheating, it is very complicated at the moment, What's more, lately many people have come here as beginners by buying an account and want to quickly get involved in paid campaigns. Al fast alternative for them.

The fixed rules of behavior for cheating using the Al method cannot be removed, these rules will add a little to the mod's work, some Al content is difficult to detect, maybe some is easy, this will add to the list of hours spent staying up late for mods, For me, if you find those who cheat the results from Al, you can report them, that way I think it will reduce those who cheat with Al, From my perspective, 90% of users cheat Al. Most of their accounts are bought, aka newcomers using old newcomers.

Yes, but it's not clear plagiarism because the content is not taken from somewhere on the web, or a forum or anywhere, it's just generated through a bot and used as if it's written by the user himself.


That's different and shouldn't be punishable just as how you can provide reference with copied content and don't get punished for plagiarism.

For me AI generated content in forum fits nicely under rule number 33:

You can actually use AI generated text for something and post it in forum, but you should post it with quotes and add note that this text was generated with xyz AI.
Anything else is going to be considered as zero or low value post and cheating.
If detected post gets reported to mods.
Simple.

I do not think any new rule needs to be added just because of AI content creation.

It can be treated under plagiarism or even spam.

I know that if we report AI-generated texts or content to moderators, they get deleted, and I also know that there is a thread for reporting AI-generated posts (I'm unable to find that thread at the moment, sorry), but, shouldn't there be an official rule in the unofficial list of forum rules against obvious AI-generated content and posts?

I use the word "obvious" because some people might argue that it's not always possible to find out whether a post has been written by a human or an AI model, but if you have used AI models yourself or you have some experience with them, you would know that the texts they usually generate will have some sort of a pattern that makes them easy to spot. Look at the snap below as an example:



There are three posts shown in the picture. Now, there are two things that you need to note. First, all the posts are starting with an almost similar tone, "You've raised some...", "You've hit the nail...", etc. The second thing is that you will not be able to find a single grammatical or punctuation mistake in all the posts. Why? Because AI is too perfect, it won't make mistakes that humans do such as forgetting a dot, maybe a comma, or maybe making a grammatical mistake in one of the sentences, etc.

So, the point is, that I believe we should have an official rule against obvious AI-generated content being posted on the forum. It should say something like:

34. Using AI-generated content and passing it on as your own is not allowed.

Anyone reported to moderators for breaking the rule should get a temporary ban initially, and if they don't stop, the second report should get them permanently banned. Alternatively, maybe there can be some other restriction that can be imposed for breaking this rule.

Looking forward to your opinions on this.