To prove authenticity, be politically incorrect in a way AI never would. You'll be dismissed, canceled and fired, but at least authentically so.
CAPTCHA v11:
> What was the name of H.P. Lovecraft's cat?
It Wasn't AI
91–100 of 134 posts
Re: It Wasn't AI
#92I've been reviewing answers to questionnaires we send out to potential software engineering candidates. Sometimes candidates seem to write 90% of the submission themselves, and then use ChatGPT for the last couple of questions (which are more general, like "Outline your thoughts on documentation in software projects"). I joked to a colleague that I'd come up with a fool-proof ChatGPT detector in one line of Python:
is_chatgpt = paragraphs[-1].startswith(('In conclusion', 'Finally'))Re: It Wasn't AI
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
But why should educational instutions care? Education is a business, students are the customers (or in countries with state-funded education, the government). If AI helps people graduate faster, that's more money to the institutions, less effort to the students, and nice statistics for the governments. At least in my country most degrees aren't worth much anyway, they just open you doors to internships where you real…
People getting into AI today follow courses like: LLM University - https://docs.cohere.com/docs/llmu and never get to learn about linear regression, bias and variance, cost function and gradient descent, regularisation and optimisation - all the good things taught by Andrew Ng in the amazing course he run 12 years ago just before creating Coursera. Is that a good thing?
I think people getting into AI today instead ask ChatGPT and similar models questions like:
> "What field of modern science relies heavily on "linear regression, bias and variance, cost function and gradient descent, regularisation and optimisation"?"
To dive into a particular topic:
> "Provide a course outline for a four week course, meeting twice a week, that focuses on linear regression in the context of machine learning and the relationship between inputs and outputs."
And to get to the actual material, zoom in some more:
> "Please expand Session 2: Simple Linear regression into an hour-long talk focused on Python coding approaches to the problem"
And again, to get some working code:
> "For topic #2, please provide an explicit code example of using numpy, pandas and scikit-learn to load a dataset, preprocess the data, and split it into training and testing sets"
Anyone can generate a course on any topic using this approach, with pretty good results.
Re: It Wasn't AI
#94On the one hand, this is sorely needed: AI detection software will inevitably be mostly snake oil. Academia and education desperately wants this software to work! As a result, selling them something that doesn't work is going to be very profitable. The most obvious problem with this class of software is how easy it would be to defeat if the students could access it themselves: generate some text, run it through the d…
this is exactly why i was stunned that someone apparently gave 3m to GPT-zero despite all its known flaws https://www.forbes.com/sites/rashishrivastava/2023/05/09/wit...
its too easy to be negative about things in hype cycles and retroactively look back and go "see! i was right! this was a terrible idea!" but.. this is a terrible idea
to ai detection fans: show us on an information theory basis how you will smuggle in enough bits, avoiding user obfuscation, please. i will change my mind and support you the moment you prove this can be done, otherwise i am default extremely skeptical
Re: It Wasn't AI
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It has spelling mistakes (which at least help demonstrate AI probably didn't write it) Nowadays if you want to be convincing you got to maek some spelling misakes. Something that looks like predictive keyboard errors, or typing errors.
Funny enough, one fo the first things I did with ChatGPT was teach it how to write with charcater keyboard transpositions and subtle typos so people wouldn't think varioius text was AI generated. Works pretty well. (Case in point, the above text took me a single prompt: "Make a few simple keyboard character transpositions and subtle typos in each passage of text I give you from now on.")
Still, I doubt an LLM would ever start a sentence with "Funny enough" (the normal usage is "Funnily enough" but even that doesn't seem like something the current crop of AIs would use without explicit prompting).
Re: It Wasn't AI
#96I've been reviewing answers to questionnaires we send out to potential software engineering candidates. Sometimes candidates seem to write 90% of the submission themselves, and then use ChatGPT for the last couple of questions (which are more general, like "Outline your thoughts on documentation in software projects"). I joked to a colleague that I'd come up with a fool-proof ChatGPT detector in one line of Python: i…
Don't forget "Overall, "
Re: It Wasn't AI
#97To prove authenticity, be politically incorrect in a way AI never would. You'll be dismissed, canceled and fired, but at least authentically so.
I tried running gpt4chan locally. It's pretty good at generating politically incorrect, racist, misogynist and antisemitic stuff.
Re: It Wasn't AI
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because educational institutions aren’t in the business of selling education: they give that away for free. Seriously, walk into any university campus and into a lecture hall, sit down and take notes. No one will stop you! No one will check ID. You can even talk to the professor and 99% of the time they’ll give you access to the course materials online at well. What students are paying for is accreditation. It’s not…
> Because educational institutions aren’t in the business of selling education: they give that away for free. Seriously, walk into any university campus and into a lecture hall, sit down and take notes. No one will stop you! No one will check ID. You can even talk to the professor and 99% of the time they’ll give you access to the course materials online at well. Can confirm. When I was a senior in high school, a pro…
When I was in college, I was dating a girl who was taking a philosophy class that was particularly interesting to me. One day we were hanging out before her class and she was telling me about their discussions, and it covered some ideas I really enjoyed discussing. Since I was in computer science, I never got the opportunity to take a lot of humanities like Philosophy and so I mentioned that I wished I could take this class. She had to go to class and just said "you can come with me if you want".
I went with her and just sat down. I took notes, I participated in discussion, and ended up going back for several weeks. I eventually stopped going as they moved onto another chapter. I popped back in a few weeks later and the only thing the teacher said when they saw me come into the lecture hall was "hey it's good to see you again". The prof knew I existed but either didn't realize or didn't care that I wasn't actually on the class roll.
Re: It Wasn't AI
#99IMO one of the way that most schools are going to end up being able to detect plagiarism is going to be a custom word processor (or something similar) that can track all of the edits made into a document. Basically, have the students type an essay where all of the keystrokes are recorded by the program, and so it can be detected by the program whether someone is copy and pasting whole essays, or if someone is actuall…
I also had a similar idea on how to determine that a piece of writing is genuine. It would be to make students use a word processor that contains a full audit trail of all changes, timestamped. The software would then use a trained AI to look for patterns that deviate from normal composition activities. This could catch a lot of the current fraud. Until someone creates AI bots to get around it...
Re: It Wasn't AI
#100On the one hand, this is sorely needed: AI detection software will inevitably be mostly snake oil. Academia and education desperately wants this software to work! As a result, selling them something that doesn't work is going to be very profitable. The most obvious problem with this class of software is how easy it would be to defeat if the students could access it themselves: generate some text, run it through the d…
> AI detection software will inevitably be mostly snake oil. Probably so. The problem, of course, is that the inability to detect AI authorship leads to the increase of general distrust of everything in society.
[deleted]