• 404found@lemmy.zipEnglish
    2·
    10 hours ago

    Trained AI can be pretty useful at writing. People just need to actually read and edit it.

    I made a website about a sport I knew nothing about. I was using AI to write the articles. I would cross reference the information against other websites on that sport and edit my AI article to make it more natural. The end goal was affiliated marketing but I lost interest after a while. Anytime you see an article like “the 10 best…” “the best hacks for…” etc, the author most likely made the article like I was doing.

    Fortunately Google has shot themselves in the foot because nobody can find anything of value with their search engine anymore. Googles AI has significantly decreased traffic to all websites as well.

  • Shayeta@feddit.orgEnglish
    142·
    1 day ago

    Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and correctness of their work. What tools they use is no concern of mine.

    • wraekscadu@vargar.orgEnglish
      2·
      7 hours ago

      Thank you.

      “Oooh they used AI, fuck them” is mostly a stance taken by people who weren’t ever going to engage with the papers as is. The only reason these people are concerned about this is because “oooo AI bad bad bad”.

      I swear, there’s no difference between these folks and the “all natural, herbal” hippies. Total lack of scientific temperament, total lack of nuance. No intention of getting to the truth. Just screaming what their perceived “ideological team” has to say about this. Just like the Bible thumpers they claim to despise.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    6·
    2 days ago

    I glimpsed though the article and I didn’t see it.

    It said it used frequency of words for determination of AI usage.

    Did it consider that AI is mostly trained of those papers and thus AI detection methods could not be as accurate as thought by the ones making this analysis?

    Did the just considered general “generic AI repeated words” or did the actually used a frequency analysis of the actual fingerprint left by the LMM that companies put there for forensic analysis (and that I don’t ever know of the companies are publishing the signatures they use).

  • Erystela@lemmy.worldEnglish
    41·
    2 days ago

    Using AI to investigate AI’s involvement. Who is responsible for evaluating the validity of that investigation? If AI is used to correct formatting, is that considered AI involvement? In that case, would a document written in a neat, well-formatted manner be considered the work of AI?

    I don’t see why it matters whether you use a pencil, a ballpoint pen, or a keyboard to write a document—I simply don’t understand the rationale behind the stance that AI should not be used.