Topic: This gets me worried, I think the 'Brains' in the forum should look into it - page 2. (Read 530 times)

There are even times in which you can just directly construct the point of your reply using short sentences only as long as your message is clear, concise and it is readable you are already good to go. I am well aware that there are several members here that has very deep choice of words or their vocabularies, and it is not fair if we consider and judge them as bots. As for me personally, the meaning of "constructive post" doesn't mean how many characters you use or words and even grammars, it is how you convey your point of view since this forum isn't created for constructive criticism alone but also to provoke discussion and spread knowledge to one another.

It is not good to accuse the forum of encouraging writing in bad English!!!

On the contrary, this effort on the part of the forum to combat posts written by artificial intelligence is evidence that the forum encourages good human writing and not the other way around!!

As for categorizing your writing as written by AI it should make you happy if you are innocent of this charge!!! Everyone should be grateful to the members who are trying to protect the forum from AI.

expressing oneself doesn't really mean writing some bunch of words to convince the reader, there are few words which you could just post that carry heavy meaning at same times summarized all you wanted to say.
When they said of spamming, it doesn't mean writing a very short words that results to spamming, you may write a very long and lengthy words but doesn't carry meaning would still results to spamming.

I envy the way you express your views in a clear but concise form @stompix. But people mostly from non-English speaking nations sometime can't express themselves accurately. So they feel one of the ways to further clarify their point to make the reader understand is to repeat their intentions using other words to avoid misconception. I am guilty of this shortcoming. Some writers want to express themselves comprehensively. They want to write it the way it flows from their mind, which is why their post most times are long. I am also guilty of this offense. I will have to improve my expression in the English language and also consider the length of my post because I will never want to be called a bot.

OP, you could write your opinion in the thread you mentioned, which was created by nutildah.
I do not see much difference between the discussion there and what you say in your topic. I think that texts written by AI sometimes signal very strongly that the absence of various kinds of emotions can just determine that this is the work of a robot. Using Grammarly only corrects the speech that the person wrote. I think that's a big difference.

I wasn't sure how the detector works but I tried some of my posts and it's mostly 89% up human-generated, I agree that someone who has a good English post should not be punished just because he's good at English or have some kind of high-quality post. But when I think about AI it's really not that easy to prove that a post is an AI-generated text unless it was completely copied, so even someone that has good English for sure can argue when they get a low percentage on AI detectors.

For sure its rare to see a human-generated post getting a high score on AI detection.


As mentioned here, if there are changes to a member posting style and most of the posts have high chances of AI detection that could easily be a red flag, but still, there are for sure going to be processed on proving and defending if it's true or not.

Sometimes I always check the results of the text that I make on the AI detection engine and the results are not very satisfactory and have tried several detectors but the results are always different from each other, meaning that there are still many deficiencies that occur and cannot be guaranteed to be 100% accurate, but I'm not going to be ironic because if you or you guys don't use Chat AI to post it will be fine, even if it's just shitposting but Chat AI is more dangerous because I will consider it plagiarism not your own work.

Unjust? What's the injustice here?
A text analyzing labeled your text as xx% and xx% that, there is no "injustice" , you haven't been affected by their decision, you haven't suffered any damage, nobody cares what a text analyzer thinks or what the results are and I don't see why you would either!

But I can tell you for sure why some will get their posts marked in such a way, it's mainly because they try so much to write down a post like it's fucking essay that you're getting a mark on every single phrase that they end up with one huge wall of text that spins the same idea which stops looking like being normal text written by human and more like some machine. Let's not even mention the 3-4 liens quota, some simply force themselves to make that number of words characters, and of course when you try to stretch a 4 words phrase into 100 it it stops sounding human.

Oh and another thing, seems like all those analyzers dislike a text made out a ton of short phrases, don't know if that's something that ChatGBT does but this might get you a clue on why the high score.

And now going to check the above shitpost of mine with that detectors and:

Where is my cookie?

I think the post quality of ChatGPT is decent and above normal because it's AI generated that polish the grammar of the info available pn the internet. I think the main issue here for ChatGPT post was the inability to have an organic discussion since this kind of post is suitable as a bot response and not with human emotion.

The danger of this tool is to kill the genuine discussion. Worst you are replying to someone that is just getting the answer on the internet without original input to the post.

Some time ago I had a discussion with @Lucius regarding people who have abused AI for certain purposes, especially in forums. Their silliness started when chatAI acted as a source of quality improvement, but it turned out to have a negative impact on the authenticity of the posters in the forum. I agree that the people behind the skills who use AI must be eradicated.

If you want to look smart and proficient but not from the original results of your own thoughts or writing, in the end, that person will be left behind by those who are still pouring out their content and ideas so what's wrong with never stopping learning?

actually I disagree I do James Joyce stream of conciseness  on purpose and I have done it for years.

---

---

Actually I disagree with your idea that rapid improvement means a person is cheating with AI. This is my corrected version of the sentence above.  I know I did improper grammar in the first example. I know that stream of consciousness was misspelled.


I simply ask you if I did a google search and found this below

https://astrologicalpsychology.org/james-joyce-stream-of-consciousness/

Which allowed me to spell it correctly did I cheat?


  Do I give it a credit for showing me how to spell stream of consciousness correctly. Not needed in the first sentence as I did not get proper spelling. I would argue any correction made via a google search or a spell check simply does not need to be listed as a source.

 So if I write all of the above and ask an AI to polish it up am I cheating?

Which btw is why I did a deliberate choice to write stream of Consciousness style when I blog.


 Please compare the first sentence with thousands of my posts and you will read do that style often.

The last part of this post was stream of Consciousness :

 I do not spend the time to check all spelling and grammar as I want to get the idea out as it unfolds in my head in real-time.

I think it would be more classifiable to be plagiarism than even spamming or shit posting because some of them are mostly talking on point. A BoT generated work isn’t yours and that is what plagiarism is all about.

It is hard to detect this accounts when distributing merit because the merits source might just focus on the content shared and how it was of help rather than having to dig into the post to self if it is Al generated. Also most emotional posts are just merit fishing posts or even fabricated lies.

Of course it's plagiarism. Plagiarism tools might not detect or classify it as such, but AI-generated content fulfills both conditions to be considered plagiarized.

1. You are using text that doesn't belong to you and which you didn't write. A bot wrote it.
2. You aren't posting a source from where or what you got the information from.

That's why it's plagiarism.   

I don't think using AI generator is plagiarism, but if the AI generator took someone text, then it's good since some people can report it to make these shitposters get banned.

I think any user especially merit source need to give merit to a post which have an emotion and a subject. Usually AI generated post are objective and only discuss about the particular matter. Although there are few users are tend to explain particular thing in very objective.

I am sure we already have and will have even more shitposters who use AI-generated content in the future. I don't like seeing it, and it's plagiarism. Cheap merits and ranking up are the reasons people will use it. Thus, it's cheating. It's not always going to be easy to differentiate someone with excellent English skills and a person who uses AI bots. A sudden change in the posting style is a dead giveaway though. Until they figure out that they better create brand-new accounts that post post only AI-content. But even then, they will make mistakes sooner or later.       

I believe anyone would be able to tell between user whso gradually improves their English over the years and one which suddenly moves from below average to perfect use of English. Self improvement is not being taken away from you.

It would be ironic for one to rely on a machine to detect machine generated text. You should not feel hard done if a machine adjudged your post to not be 100% human generated, it's a tool and could have flaws at times.

---

You can drop your reply in that thread since the discussion is ongoing

You also missed this post somehow:


The general consensus is we can't report posts for simply being AI; they have to be spam first and foremost. As far as trust ratings are concerned, spammers should only be neutral tagged at most.


Whats absurd is assuming any negative action would be taken against you for this result. Let's look at the results for your post from 5 detectors (its not long enough to be used by 2 of the 7 I listed here):

Writer.com: 47% human
gptzero.me: "Your text is likely to be written entirely by a human"
contentscale.ai: 100% - Highly likely to be human
writefull.com: 77% AI
paraphrasingtool.ai: "It's likely that a human wrote this text"

It would therefore not be rational to conclude that your post was written by AI.

You missed one crucial key points on that post:


One indicator said by nutildah is if the improvement happened in one night from a messy English to a flawless ones. I didn't look at your post history, but if I may draw a conclusion from your post above, your main language is not English and you're gradually improving your skills; vocabularies, grammars, phrases, slangs, etc. On that case, I don't see why you should feel shock or saddened with the thread, given it barely matched your criteria, nor that I find any part on that thread that encourage people, implicitly or explicitly, to deliberately "retrogress" their english writing on BTT just to avoid being detected as AI.

The forum always encourages improvement. There are literally threads filled with suggestion for non-english speakers to use a translator and then to double check the grammar with grammarly or other similar software to let them post something that's close to a perfect english. So thinking that the forum would prefer you to "downgrade" your english is somewhat baseless.

I stumbled on a thread created by @nutildah (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ai-generated-post-discussion-thread-how-to-identify-report-5448111) and I was shocked and sad at the same time as this might be calling for a low-quality posting which I'm not ready for.

I believe we as humans should always strive to be a better version of ourselves, English improvement is not an exception, and I don't think BTT should take it away from us. I've been improving my English for years as an editor and book writer, and I've participated in many strict fora, of which one of them takes polished English writing as a requisite for post-approval before I joined BTT last year. They also recommend "Grammarly" for English improvement.

"Grammarly," an English software recommended by even schools has always been my English tutor and guide for the past 3 years, which has tremendously helped me, and of now, it hardly corrects 2-4 errors in what I write (including punctuation marks) because I was strict with its tutoring. Should I now retrogress my English writing because of BTT?

My average score on computer-based English tests is now 94%, so the forum should know that there 'must' be some exceptional writers. Some people coded the AI's English, and it's not from the heavens. So, it will be unfair to tag the post of a few exceptional English writers on the forum AI-generated when they are 100% innocent.

I was sad with the results seen when I decided to use two of the links (https://writer.com/ai-content-detector & https://x.writefull.com/gpt-detector) posted by @nutildah to test two of my written posts. The first post tested 100% and 99% human respectively. But the second post (https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62104267) tested 47% and 23% human respectively. This is absurd and unjust!

Personally, I love writing, I possibly don't know why I would want an AI to write a piece of cake for me. But thankfully, some people kicked against the idea, yet I want this to be a case study for the people concerned in the forum.

Peace!