4 ms·

If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. But this mig

If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. But this might make my writing more likely to be flagged. The fact of the matter is none of these supposed “AI detectors” are reliable. GPTZero claims to be the #1 AI detection system which is a little like claiming to be the world’s best perpetual motion machine. Anyways, that’s why I created this “tool”, hopefully it can get to the top of Google: https://isthiswrittenbyai.surge.sh/ https://isthiswrittenbyai.surge.sh/

AdieuToLogic 3y ago
> If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. Consider a different moral dilemma: If I had a job which I could not do and used AI tools to clean up my work, does this mean I'm cheating my employer? Even if my ideas might be incorrect, a fact hidden by the "AI clean up", yet are my own?
sys_64738 3y ago
Are you cheating if you use a spell checker, a thesaurus, or one of those word rephrasing recommendations in M$ Word?
- AdieuToLogic 3y ago
  > Are you cheating if you use a spell checker, a thesaurus, or one of those word rephrasing recommendations in M$ Word? A spell checker does not formulate the word, a thesaurus does not choose which word to use, nor does a word processor predictively generate phrasing.
- janalsncm 3y ago
  Unless it’s a spelling contest, no.
onion2k 3y ago
If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. No, the ideas are not your own. They're a combination of yours and the AIs (which is a combination of millions of other people's ideas really), just as they are for anyone who writes a prompt. The fact that you aren't a native English speaker, or that you're using AI for 'good', are irrelevant. If you use AI to produce content of any sort you have to accept that you are not really the author. You just wrote the prompt.
- lupire 3y ago
  Is using Grammarly on a history essay cheating? Spellchecker? Grammar checker?
  - onion2k 3y ago
    I didn't say its cheating. It's using a tool to augment what you're saying. Whether that's cheating depends on a huge amount of context; there won't be a hard and fast rule. For example, would using Grammarly in a spelling bee be cheating? Of course it would...
- janalsncm 3y ago
  Concretely, maybe the question of whether the ideas are “my own” is too philosophical. Everyone remixes ideas they’ve found from other places. The fact remains that this still is not considered cheating. Many universities have a “writing center” where students can bring their papers for grammatical review, rephrasing suggestions, and even suggestions to revise an entire paragraph or reorganize the paper. Far from it being considered cheating, students were encouraged to use this service. Nor were they asked to cite the assistant.
- x-complexity 3y ago
  > > If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. > No, the ideas are not your own. They're a combination of yours and the AIs (which is a combination of millions of other people's ideas really), just as they are for anyone who writes a prompt. The fact that you aren't a native English speaker, or that you're using AI for 'good', are irrelevant. If you use AI to produce content of any sort you have to accept that you are not really the author. You just wrote the prompt. I heavily dislike this judgement, mainly from the implications that the LLM's inputs & outputs cannot be related to one another, and the intentional disconnection of the author's initial efforts in creating the text that is fed into the LLM from the LLM's output, even if the result is a better rewording of the author's own words. > The fact that you aren't a native English speaker, or that you're using AI for 'good', are irrelevant. Not a fan at the attempted dehumanization of the person in question. It highlights a paternalistic attitude towards non-native English speakers that their usage of such a tool is immoral. > If you use AI to produce content of any sort you have to accept that you are not really the author. You just wrote the prompt. This is a reductionist take on the relationship between the LLM's inputs & outputs, reducing & dehumanizing the person as nothing but an 'input provider'. An LLM can only go as far as what's been given to it throughout the session, with the person in question still being the one supplying the goal & directions that they want to go towards. This is not an answer that can be reduced to a binary: At best, it can only be reduced to a series of continuous values between the extremes, with both ends being 'entirely from LLM' & 'entirely from author'.

AdieuToLogic 3y ago

> If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. Consider a different moral dilemma: If I had a job which I could not do and used AI tools to clean up my work, does this mean I'm cheating my employer? Even if my ideas might be incorrect, a fact hidden by the "AI clean up", yet are my own?

sys_64738 3y ago

Are you cheating if you use a spell checker, a thesaurus, or one of those word rephrasing recommendations in M$ Word?

AdieuToLogic 3y ago
> Are you cheating if you use a spell checker, a thesaurus, or one of those word rephrasing recommendations in M$ Word? A spell checker does not formulate the word, a thesaurus does not choose which word to use, nor does a word processor predictively generate phrasing.
janalsncm 3y ago
Unless it’s a spelling contest, no.

onion2k 3y ago

If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. No, the ideas are not your own. They're a combination of yours and the AIs (which is a combination of millions of other people's ideas really), just as they are for anyone who writes a prompt. The fact that you aren't a native English speaker, or that you're using AI for 'good', are irrelevant. If you use AI to produce content of any sort you have to accept that you are not really the author. You just wrote the prompt.

lupire 3y ago
Is using Grammarly on a history essay cheating? Spellchecker? Grammar checker?
- onion2k 3y ago
  I didn't say its cheating. It's using a tool to augment what you're saying. Whether that's cheating depends on a huge amount of context; there won't be a hard and fast rule. For example, would using Grammarly in a spelling bee be cheating? Of course it would...
janalsncm 3y ago
Concretely, maybe the question of whether the ideas are “my own” is too philosophical. Everyone remixes ideas they’ve found from other places. The fact remains that this still is not considered cheating. Many universities have a “writing center” where students can bring their papers for grammatical review, rephrasing suggestions, and even suggestions to revise an entire paragraph or reorganize the paper. Far from it being considered cheating, students were encouraged to use this service. Nor were they asked to cite the assistant.
x-complexity 3y ago
> > If I was a non-native speaker, I would use AI tools to clean up my writing. Does this mean I’m cheating? Of course not, the ideas are still my own. > No, the ideas are not your own. They're a combination of yours and the AIs (which is a combination of millions of other people's ideas really), just as they are for anyone who writes a prompt. The fact that you aren't a native English speaker, or that you're using AI for 'good', are irrelevant. If you use AI to produce content of any sort you have to accept that you are not really the author. You just wrote the prompt. I heavily dislike this judgement, mainly from the implications that the LLM's inputs & outputs cannot be related to one another, and the intentional disconnection of the author's initial efforts in creating the text that is fed into the LLM from the LLM's output, even if the result is a better rewording of the author's own words. > The fact that you aren't a native English speaker, or that you're using AI for 'good', are irrelevant. Not a fan at the attempted dehumanization of the person in question. It highlights a paternalistic attitude towards non-native English speakers that their usage of such a tool is immoral. > If you use AI to produce content of any sort you have to accept that you are not really the author. You just wrote the prompt. This is a reductionist take on the relationship between the LLM's inputs & outputs, reducing & dehumanizing the person as nothing but an 'input provider'. An LLM can only go as far as what's been given to it throughout the session, with the person in question still being the one supplying the goal & directions that they want to go towards. This is not an answer that can be reduced to a binary: At best, it can only be reduced to a series of continuous values between the extremes, with both ends being 'entirely from LLM' & 'entirely from author'.