• DopamineDaydreams@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    “admit” like this was something they denied? Everyone always knew that ai text detectors don’t work and they never claimed otherwise.

    • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      The issue is that schools have been using detectors to flag AI essays. When students (wrongly) get caught up in them, they get penalized even if they never used any AI to help them write the essay in question. Sort of like a plagiarism filter falsely flagging a paragraph as plagiarized, even if the student didn’t plagiarize it.

      • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It also disproportionately flags the work of neurodivergent students, to add a bonus reason that these detectors are a dogshit idea.

          • LukeMedia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Neurodivergent people are secretly robots, and sometimes the AI text detectors can pick up on this, and risk ruining our cover.

            In all seriousness, I looked it up out of curiosity and couldn’t find a study stating that, but that isn’t surprising as the use of AI detectors is relatively new. I do think there is a high likelihood that the statement is true, just due to how a neurodivergent person often writes compared to a neurotypical person. This is not something that you could say matter-of-fact though, just anecdotally.

            • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’m glad I went to school (mostly) before all the automatic scanning…

              In college I had a lot of stuff flagged as plagiarism, including a metaphysics paper I wrote in which I created a new hypothesis for consciousness (not necessarily a good one, mind, but entirely unique) because yup, robot.

              It’s so weird that writing properly and without error gets you flagged as a cheater…. That supposed to be the damned standard you are being measured on…

              But yeah, it sounds highly plausible, but I don’t tend to take assertions as fact without support, so thanks for looking into it for me :)

              • LukeMedia@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                From what I understand, a lot of AI text detectors work from measuring “perplexity and burstiness” which basically means, lower randomness, lower emotion, and sentence uniformity is more likely to get flagged as AI text. Those are all things that can be associated with neurodivergence, so I see where that statement would come from. That’s also the way you are expected to write formal essays.

                As for plagiarism detectors, I don’t know much about them except that they false flag the shit out of everything.

      • DopamineDaydreams@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh yeah it’s an issue, but none of that is on OpenAI. There’s no admission here. It’s a statement from an authority to shut up the idiots, like a map maker saying earth is a sphere, something we already know but somehow it’s still believed by many.

  • ᗪᗩᗰᑎ
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    1 year ago

    I figured this was the case from th start. basically as useful as a polygraph.

  • TheMoose@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    This isn’t an admittance, as that implies a fault. This is a statement of fact. Of course AI writing detectors don’t work, any human can write in any style, and an AI can replicate any writing style.

    • chaogomu@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      AI can replicate any writing style.

      This is false, mostly because AI outputs nonsense that almost looks like real writing. It’s all firmly in the uncanny valley of gibberish.

      Is true that an AI cannot spot AI writing, but for anything longer than a paragraph or two a human can spot AI output most of the time.

      • AngrilyEatingMuffins@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the people who say stuff like this probably haven’t been interacting with one in a while, or maybe just didn’t know how to prompt it.

      • Anamnesis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        As a professor that has to grade a lot of papers, I’m tempted to agree with this. But we probably need some well-conducted research to determine if this conventional wisdom is actually correct.

      • greenskye@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This feels a little like people who think they can always spot plastic surgery, when really they can just always spot the bad-okay cases, but completely miss the good outcomes of plastic surgery

      • papalonian@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you seen AI in recent months…? It’s really not that cut and dry anymore. Might see some hiccups here and there but nowhere near the “uncanny valley of gibberish” levels you describe, at least not on the good ones