281–290 of 292 posts
I'm glad that they did, although they should obviously done an announcement for it. The amount of people in the ecosystem who thinks it's even possible to detect if something is AI written or not when it's just a couple of sentences is staggering high. And somehow, people in power seems to put their faith in some of these tools that guarantee a certain amount of truthfulness when in reality it's impossible they could…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit suspicious to type an essay linearly from start to finish, though.
Is it? That's how I've always written them (and still do to this day). I write the first draft linearly from start to end, then go back and do my revising and editing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a bit suspicious to type an essay linearly from start to finish, though.
Will Google Docs provide that level of detail for revision history in a way that teachers can easily see that's it's likely AI-generated, and have high confidence in that?
I'm glad that they did, although they should obviously done an announcement for it. The amount of people in the ecosystem who thinks it's even possible to detect if something is AI written or not when it's just a couple of sentences is staggering high. And somehow, people in power seems to put their faith in some of these tools that guarantee a certain amount of truthfulness when in reality it's impossible they could…
Dr. Michio Kaku claimed in an interview that it may eventually be possible for quantum computers to guarantee a certain level of truthfulness. I didn't really follow his argument and it seemed a little hand-wavey, but I can't prove that he's wrong. https://mkaku.org/home/tag/quantum-computing/
(that said, "may eventually be possible" is so weak a claim it's already meaningless. Quantum fluctuations may eventually turn me into a potato but it's not keeping me up at night)
Funny incentive problem, OpenAI obviously has an incentive to use it's best AI detection tool for adversarial training, with the result that it's detection tool will not be very good against chatGPT generated text because it is trained to defeat the detection tool.
If they wanted to disguise their content as coming from a human, they probably wouldn't keep saying "As an AI chatbot, I can't..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't sound like it to me. Researching a topic can be a lot of effort, while typing is easy, even with occasional rephrasing. Hell, even with constant rephrasing it's not very hard.
Having a student sit there and type out, word for word, a decent essay on the subject is probably fairly effective education for a LOT of subjects. In the same vein that letting students write calculator programs to do the quadratic formula for them during a test is actually a pretty good way to get them to learn the quadratic formula. It's not an exact equivalent to the intent of an essay today - from an education p…
Rather than try to detect if pieces were generated by AI, why not just check if they're plagiarized off the outputs of a bunch of popular models? We already have traditional plagiarism analysis methods, we just need a corpus of most of the recent outputs from the most popular LLM services to check against. OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, and any other LLM-as-a-service companies could profitably sell access to these corpor…
One reason would be that LLM's don't tend to output verbatim pieces from their dataset (unless explicitly prompted to do so). This is made further complicated by the "temperature" setting allowing users to make output even more "creative" than its dataset. In OpenAI's case, its writing style usually comes from OpenAI's in-house dataset they used for RLHF. This is what gives it the ability to chat and respond with its…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just use a certificate chain. The manufacturer can provide each camera its own private key, signed by the manufacturer.
And when the sensor bus is hijacked to directly feed “trusted” data into the processor?
We shattered the turing test and now we want to put it back into pandora’s box because we don’t like the repercussions.