That article sounds like it was AI-generated…
The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
101–110 of 171 posts
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#102It really sounds like that company wanted an excuse to fire him and negate any contractual obligations to him.
You don't run someone's writing through one of these detectors if you like them.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#103I find it weird that people here even think it’s possible… if you mix it around, there is no way to tell. Stop trying.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was one of the students who could nail the exams and assignments I turned in, but then I BOMBED oral exams. Because of crippling anxiety. So how do you account for that? Or autism? Or any other sort of neurological disability?
I'm on the spectrum. If I were a professor though, I would use a baseline for every student. At the beginning of the semester, have an oral exam for a difficult topic that the students are expected to already know. Material from a prerequisite class would be good. I would always give 100% for that oral exam if the student showed up. And that exam would become that student's baseline ; their future oral exams would be…
Definitely. Once word of this system gets out, it will be gamed by students who will throw the first exam deliberately. Even without this sabotage it would still feel extremely unfair to students who did well on the first exam and are now being punished for it.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#105> Desperate, Michael even reached out to the company providing the AI test. To no avail. They simply told him he should set up an account with them, buy himself some credits, and test his articles again himself. At the end of the day, nothing changed the fact that there was this all-encompassing metric being thrown at him saying: You are cheating. Snake Oil Company: "This person's articles were probably -- to almost…
Snake oil and a protection racket.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
If students what to deprive themselves of the opportunity to learn then that's their perogative.
Yes but this only further waters down the already watered down legitimacy of a degree. I know a lot of people think students should be building things independently of classes but that kind of misses the point of dedicating a full time investment in guided learning at the hands of an expert instructor. If instructors graded rigorously and had a magic cheating detection too (where cheating is defined overly capaciousl…
The university system is rather outdated at this stage anyways. As an institution of learning there is still a place for universities in terms of research and inquiry, but degrees seem like an outdated concept. Maybe we can break down degrees to certifications that can be pieced together to demonstrate a set of skills. Maybe we can value independent projects more. The academic system is so broken at this point that I don't think much value will be lost if they lost all credibility, and let them scramble to create some more value.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#107Pretty sure we are going to see a rise in the use of Oral Exams. The teachers that don't want to use them will continue to churn out students that score high and don't know how to articulate a damn thing. Which may have been the status quo anyway. Edit: I didn't like my original post
I was one of the students who could nail the exams and assignments I turned in, but then I BOMBED oral exams. Because of crippling anxiety. So how do you account for that? Or autism? Or any other sort of neurological disability?
Universities already have systems in place to allow students with disabilities to take alternate forms of assessments. So, perhaps, students who can't deal with oral exams can choose to give written exams.
Btw, I was a professor and I saw students on both ends of the spectrum. Students who would bomb an oral evaluation because of anxiety but would do well in written exams. And student who would bomb written exams, but would totally ace an oral evaluation. Since, a professor's job is to create well-rounded individuals, courses should include a mix of different assessment types, so students slowly build up the skills to handle all of them. Of course, augmented by guidance and feedback on how they can build those skills.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't the underlying concept of AI detectors BS as well? You could say something like "We cannot guarantee beyond reasonable doubt that this content is AI generated". Which one could argue is also always true.
This is something that I suspect will get easier in the next couple years as AI research progresses. I could imagine some sort of reversal tool being made such that "given this output and these weights files, how likely is it that these weights produced this output with a reasonable input?" I don't know, that might be incredibly difficult forever, or it might be something that someone has a breakthrough in and manage…
> that might be incredibly difficult forever, or it might be something that someone has a breakthrough in and manages to do.
well, why not train an AI on it?
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm on the spectrum. If I were a professor though, I would use a baseline for every student. At the beginning of the semester, have an oral exam for a difficult topic that the students are expected to already know. Material from a prerequisite class would be good. I would always give 100% for that oral exam if the student showed up. And that exam would become that student's baseline ; their future oral exams would be…
Definitely. Once word of this system gets out, it will be gamed by students who will throw the first exam deliberately. Even without this sabotage it would still feel extremely unfair to students who did well on the first exam and are now being punished for it.
Well, on future exams, they're still going to have to answer questions with some knowledge, and sabotaging wouldn't help so much with that.
But the other problem is harder to fix. I guess I could be much harsher in the first one, and go easier on the real exams later? Maybe that would reduce the number of students who do well on the first one?
Eh, I'm not a professor. Not my problem.
Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers
#110There's a key sentence hidden right at the end of this article: > They were terrified of Google downranking any AI-generated content, and because of the apparently clear results from their AI checker, they couldn’t be convinced otherwise. It sounds to me like the client might even have believed the evidence that he provided them showing that he didn't use AI to write the work... ... but they're in the SEO game, and t…
Doesn't this mean Google has an AI-detector that is somehow accurately finding these? Otherwise the majority of its index would be falsely flagged.
What do they use?