Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

authory.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 171 posts

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#21

Post by kleiba »

dumbfounder wrote: post #19
jupp0r wrote: post #14

Why even care? If the article is well written and well researched and it's seemingly impossible for readers to tell the difference, what's the problem with using AI to improve it? Did people care when computers were used instead of typewriters? When spell checkers became popular?

It said in the article that they were afraid that google would downrank them for having AI generated content.

In which case it really doesn't matter whether the writing was written by a human author or whether it was AI-generated. The effect would be the same, if an AI detector (mis-)classifies the content as generated.

Does that warrant the author to be fired though?

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#23

Post by jdiff »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #16
Buttons840 wrote: post #9

I want to see an "AI detector" that just marks everything as being not AI generated. Then, whenever someone is accused of using an AI by some nameless website, they can present their own website that shows they didn't use AI. Professor: "The website said you used an AI." Student: "Well, here's a website claiming I didn't use an AI." Professor: "I don't know if I believe that website, let's look into the merits of how…

What you want is a sort of AI Witches' Scales? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oudewater#Buildings

Not quite. Oudewater offered fair scales. What this guy's talking about are still rigged scales, just oppositely rigged scales. The only reason nobody was ever found a witch there was because the underlying concepts were BS.

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#25

Post by sidewndr46 »

Waterluvian wrote: post #15
whycome wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda like asking for the source code to the breathalyzer? https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2007/08/im-not-drunk-off...

I would kill to watch some smartass show up to court with their own ridiculous-looking black box "breathalyzer" and draw the parallel to "why do you magically trust theirs and not ours?"

The answer would be simple: because we pay this other group with taxpayer money.

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#26

Post by manifoldgeo »

Kim_Bruning wrote: post #16
Buttons840 wrote: post #9

I want to see an "AI detector" that just marks everything as being not AI generated. Then, whenever someone is accused of using an AI by some nameless website, they can present their own website that shows they didn't use AI. Professor: "The website said you used an AI." Student: "Well, here's a website claiming I didn't use an AI." Professor: "I don't know if I believe that website, let's look into the merits of how…

What you want is a sort of AI Witches' Scales? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oudewater#Buildings

From the linked article: " After the weighing, they received an official certificate proclaiming them not a witch... Certificates would state that 'the body weight is in proportion to its build'. The reasoning behind this is the old belief that a witch has no soul and therefore weighs significantly less than an ordinary person".

I love this piece of history so much, thank you for sharing it! Adding this one to my bookmarks :-)

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#27

Post by digging »

user3939382 wrote: post #18
swatcoder wrote: post #6

If your work looks so much like generated content that it’s flagging detectors, then it’s also probably the work doomed to be replaced by generated content soon enough (if not already). I don’t think current content generators will destroy many professions any time soon, but a lot of high-volume/low-value work is going to get consumed by them. This seems like an example of that work. Hopefully, this guy didn’t expect…

> pick up a new career It sounds so easy put like that. Hmm.. what do I have to do today? Get some mustard at the grocery store, pick up a new career, drop the dog off at the vet.

Yeah lol it sounds ridiculous. But playing devil's advocate: Perhaps a different form of writing would be a more sustainable career.

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#28

Post by waythenewsgoes »

minimaxir wrote: post #3

Legal question: if a writer loses a job due to a false accusal of using AI, would they win a damages lawsuit against the AI detector service if they can prove that AI content detection is knowingly imprecise? That's why those types of services (including OpenAI's initial AI detector) often have huge legal disclaimers saying not to take it as 100% accurate.

I personally hope this will be the course of action we see being taken against these AI detector services. It is well-known to many that these are essentially snake oil salesmen, and it has been damaging in other contexts too, such as in academic settings where students are penalized for similar false accusations.

As LLMs continue to improve, it would seem that it is only going to get more difficult to accurately distinguish between content which is AI generated vs human generated, so barring some kind of AI-detection breakthrough, these services will continue to plague students and writers with horrible false positive rates.

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#29

Post by bee_rider »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #11
hilux wrote: post #2

These AI detectors have all the validity of phrenology. You can enter some of your own writing (I did) to easily see for yourself. The text I entered had been online, and still is online, longer than AI writers have been around - but that doesn't seem to feed into their logic.

The whole idea of an "AI detector" is stupid. If it ever does work, it will only work until someone trains a model against it.

And anyway, text exists to be read by humans. If the buyer needs an “AI detector” to tell if the copy was AI generated, the AI would seem to be good enough.

I think this only exists to facilitate some already-bad heuristics, like the idea that nobody in-house needs to check the contractor’s work-product.

Re: The false positive rate of AI detectors and its effect on freelance writers

#30

Post by Analemma_ »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #10

Surely this is defamation? If I write a program to defame someone, is that still defamation?

Nope, not even close (at least in the United States). It varies a little by state, but in general defamation requires making either knowingly false statements, or having a malicious disregard for the truth, combined with intent to harm. An AI detection generator that gets a wrong answer meets neither of those requirements. You could potentially sue your employer or anyone else who took action on the false report, but the detector itself is probably totally immune.
Post reply on HN