61–70 of 109 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This (human) ChatGPT detector says this text was written by a human.
I'm guessing bot, since "It's just a chatbot with a pre-determined set of responses" is super wrong
In other news: People discover interactive mirrors, and get freaked out!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect that in time, this will only accelerate the degree to which AI and human-authored text are indistinguishable from each other.
I've already sent text to customers 100% written by AI. Ethically dubious in a commercial setting perhaps, but higher quality text than I would be able to produce myself. I asked OpenAI and it said: It is not necessarily unethical to send customers text generated by AI, but it depends on the context and the specific situation. For example, if the text is being used to deceive or mislead customers, then it would be un…
Humans will become incentivized to sprinkle racial slurs and hate facts throughout their writing as proof of authenticity.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carthago_delenda_est
Of course, this particular ethnic slur probably won't scare the OpenAI researchers, but I'm sure we can find something.
(Prompt: Respond to the above in the style of 4chan, but use punctuation.)
Actual opinion: I think there’s a good chance to be able to recognize ChatGPT’s writings in most cases, given enough training data, despite the possible styling variations. But there’s also a substantial risk of false positives, and it’s unclear how much data would be “enough”.
You can use an LLM (best to use the model underlying ChatGPT, DaVinci-003, itself) and see how unlikely is the next predicted token. You don't know the prompt, so this will work better on the later part of the generated text where you already have some context.
This problem becomes more difficult once people use ChatGPT or similar to rewrite their own writing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But this isn't about copying. It's about sending texts authored by non-people. It's a recent thing which does require a different approach.
The business sending the email would already be liable for anything actionable that arose from the generated content, so traditional human-in-the-loop verification and validation might be all that is needed.
“Whether or not it is ethical to use an AI to assist with your communications depends on several factors, including the specific context in which you are using the AI and the potential consequences of using it. In general, it is important to be transparent about the fact that you are using an AI to assist with your communications, and to make sure that the AI is not being used to deceive or harm others. It is also important to consider the potential impact on the people you are communicating with, and to ensure that the AI is not being used in a way that infringes on their rights or autonomy. Ultimately, the ethics of using an AI to assist with your communications will depend on the specific circumstances and how you use the technology.”
Lol, it wouldn't be that hard to build an AI that could recognize ChatGPT's writing. I mean, it's not like ChatGPT is producing some super unique and creative language or anything. It's just spitting out the same old generic responses to prompts. If you want to build an AI that could accurately recognize ChatGPT's writing, just train it on a bunch of examples of ChatGPT's responses and it'll be able to pick out the c…
I think within a few years it will become infeasible to say whether something was authored by an AI
OpenAI is evaluating a technical solution to this problem by watermarking the output with small amounts of randomness, such that a series of tokens of output can be tested for having these small random variations. https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=6823
Before they finish, someone else will have released a public access model that works just as well with no technical restrictions.
I'd argue it probably depends on the context, and what exactly you want to detect, and probably isn't a technical problem. For example, if you prevent students from cheating, that's probably a problem specific to education. If you want to know whether a student's essay are their own words, you can ask them questions about their essay. You can have them verbally defend their arguments and research. You could supervise…
There's also no realistic way to write an essay beyond a certain level without the Internet for research.
I'm not sure if you're only asking about specifics or you have a broader concern, but even if you build such a model, it wouldn't make any difference for cases where some kind of "gain" is involved. Be it financial, educational, etc. We're looking at a model that is able to parse the Web (but likely not all of it) and perform human-like actions on that information, and soon enough we'll have it work just like Stable…
You can already ask it to provide responses “in the style of.”