AI content concerns and solutions
Anonymous said:<< post removed >>
Brenda hi I hope you're doing well. Do you have an opinion as to the posting of AI chat bot generated content to the site, if it should be sectioned off somehow or removed, and if we should revise the site posting rules and guidelines to include AI generated content?
Brenda hi I hope you're doing well. Do you have an opinion as to the posting of AI chat bot generated content to the site, if it should be sectioned off somehow or removed, and if we should revise the site posting rules and guidelines to include AI generated content?
Thank you for the clarification Daniel.
As always you are a voice of reason, and I greatly appreciate you.
I agree wholeheartedly.
DanielChristensen said:
Betty thank you for taking this AI generated content issue over to the Suggestions thread as we hopefully come together and decide as a community how we should move forward.
My suggestion is that any content that is reported to a mod as being suspected of being bot generated, and therefore not the original and authentic creation of the person posting, should be treated the same as plagiarism. With the rules of governance that are already in place for plagiarism applied to bot generated content, we can transition into a feasible means of addressing this new aspect of posting to the site. As such, what I'm asking the site to do is:
Amend the site rules to include the posting of AI generated content, the consequences for posting AI generated content, and enforce those consequences in the same manner as the mods enforce content that is decided to be not written by the person whom posted it, ergo, treat chat bot content as plagiarism.
By our current rules, we can quote someone else's writing, but the entire post cannot be someone else's content, it has to be original content by the person posting it.
The reasons for this are that this site rewards people with trophies for posting poems and critiques. People posting content they did not write themselves should not be allowed to win trophies we are supposed to be awarded for original content.
The ethics for surreptitiously posting AI generated content should be considered the same as for plagiarism. The difference being, we can definitively point out the original posting of plagiarized poetry, with chat bot generated content, we have to take a different approach.
I have demonstrated how AI generated content follows patterns of context that can be reasonably predicted by the zerogpt website. If the site moderators believe, within a reasonable margin of doubt, that content posted to this site has been generated by an AI, I believe the person whom posted it should be treated as if they have plagiarized their content.
I hope our fellow members will weigh in on this subject and that appropriate measures will be taken to restore the integrity of our posts, poems, critiques, contests, awards and trophies.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
As always you are a voice of reason, and I greatly appreciate you.
I agree wholeheartedly.
DanielChristensen said:
Betty thank you for taking this AI generated content issue over to the Suggestions thread as we hopefully come together and decide as a community how we should move forward.
My suggestion is that any content that is reported to a mod as being suspected of being bot generated, and therefore not the original and authentic creation of the person posting, should be treated the same as plagiarism. With the rules of governance that are already in place for plagiarism applied to bot generated content, we can transition into a feasible means of addressing this new aspect of posting to the site. As such, what I'm asking the site to do is:
Amend the site rules to include the posting of AI generated content, the consequences for posting AI generated content, and enforce those consequences in the same manner as the mods enforce content that is decided to be not written by the person whom posted it, ergo, treat chat bot content as plagiarism.
By our current rules, we can quote someone else's writing, but the entire post cannot be someone else's content, it has to be original content by the person posting it.
The reasons for this are that this site rewards people with trophies for posting poems and critiques. People posting content they did not write themselves should not be allowed to win trophies we are supposed to be awarded for original content.
The ethics for surreptitiously posting AI generated content should be considered the same as for plagiarism. The difference being, we can definitively point out the original posting of plagiarized poetry, with chat bot generated content, we have to take a different approach.
I have demonstrated how AI generated content follows patterns of context that can be reasonably predicted by the zerogpt website. If the site moderators believe, within a reasonable margin of doubt, that content posted to this site has been generated by an AI, I believe the person whom posted it should be treated as if they have plagiarized their content.
I hope our fellow members will weigh in on this subject and that appropriate measures will be taken to restore the integrity of our posts, poems, critiques, contests, awards and trophies.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
the wyryding way cited.
code locked use it against it please Dune cited code loosed.
https://www.amazon.com/WYRDING-WAY-mysterious-weaving-destiny/dp/B086GDBNW8
code locked use it against it please Dune cited code loosed.
https://www.amazon.com/WYRDING-WAY-mysterious-weaving-destiny/dp/B086GDBNW8
Just curious as to why we would even consider content on this site that was generated by a computer? I didn’t even know that was a thing but I had suspected the reviews were somehow generated - I never considered that the poetry could be fake. Computer generated poetry isn’t art. My opinion.
I think we are approaching it in two ways.
DC has offered a line of thought that it's plagerism, and we should treat it as such.
I'm offering a possibility that we ask writers using this technique to identify as AI Generated poems and reviews.
Personally? Fuck that shit. It's a disgrace to the craft and it pisses me off seven ways to Sunday.
But, can we really stop it? Would it be better to label it? To ask it to self identify? To avoid it and curtail it in a way that allows the person generating content to feel included in some way.
We had several contests, and this months' top reviewing spot, taken by AI. We could exclude that.
If we simply eliminate the AI by citing plagerism, then ... we have this huge onus of proof and so much work. I don't want to be the AI police, I want to read your shit, you know?
How do you think, as a community, we should react?
Everavalon said:Just curious as to why we would even consider content on this site that was generated by a computer? I didn’t even know that was a thing but I had suspected the reviews were somehow generated - I never considered that the poetry could be fake. Computer generated poetry isn’t art. My opinion.
DC has offered a line of thought that it's plagerism, and we should treat it as such.
I'm offering a possibility that we ask writers using this technique to identify as AI Generated poems and reviews.
Personally? Fuck that shit. It's a disgrace to the craft and it pisses me off seven ways to Sunday.
But, can we really stop it? Would it be better to label it? To ask it to self identify? To avoid it and curtail it in a way that allows the person generating content to feel included in some way.
We had several contests, and this months' top reviewing spot, taken by AI. We could exclude that.
If we simply eliminate the AI by citing plagerism, then ... we have this huge onus of proof and so much work. I don't want to be the AI police, I want to read your shit, you know?
How do you think, as a community, we should react?
Everavalon said:Just curious as to why we would even consider content on this site that was generated by a computer? I didn’t even know that was a thing but I had suspected the reviews were somehow generated - I never considered that the poetry could be fake. Computer generated poetry isn’t art. My opinion.
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
I think we need to just keep it simple: Written by a person. With a brain. A heartbeat. Not auto generated.
I don't write art, personally, I write porn. So it's all super subjective.
It IS about writing. And we should really work to elevate and protect the practice.
Anonymous said:<< post removed >>
I don't write art, personally, I write porn. So it's all super subjective.
It IS about writing. And we should really work to elevate and protect the practice.
Anonymous said:<< post removed >>
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
