4 ms·

There's no ban on removing AI content as far as I'm aware - admins just upped the evidence requirement for determining a post as AI-generated, seemingly in resp

by Ukv 3y ago

There's no ban on removing AI content as far as I'm aware - admins just upped the evidence requirement for determining a post as AI-generated, seemingly in response to high false positive rates of hunches and current detectors: > We recently performed a set of analyses on the current approach to AI-generated content moderation. The conclusions of these analyses strongly indicate to us that AI-generated content is not being properly identified across the network, and that the potential for false-positives is very high. > In order to help mitigate the issue, we've asked moderators to apply a very strict standard of evidence to determining whether a post is AI-authored when deciding to suspend a user. > We've reminded moderators that suspensions (and typically mod messages as well) are for real, verifiable malfeasance only, and should not be enacted on the basis of hunches, guesses, intuition, or unverified heuristics https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/389582/what-is-the-network-policy-regarding-ai-generated-content https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/389582/what-is-the-...

fabian2k 3y ago
This is essentially a ban on removing AI content, the cases where it is still allowed to remove the posts are exceedingly rare. This is rather confusing as the public policy doesn't contain those details. I'm a moderator on a small SE site, so I have seen the internal communication between SE and the mods on this.
- Ukv 3y ago
  > This is essentially a ban on removing AI content I think framing it as "a ban on removing AI content" is wrong/misleading and the reason for softwaredoug's question about whether you'd even be allowed to edit low-quality hallucinations. To my understanding you can still remove/edit/ban for all the same reasons as normal content, just that the additional reason (removing for inherently being AI generated) is now significantly stricter. > the cases where it is still allowed to remove the posts are exceedingly rare. Not aware of the internal guidelines unless there's something you're allowed to share, but generally I could understand the admins' desire to err towards high-precision over high-recall.
  - fabian2k 3y ago
    This gets into the particulars of how moderation on SO usually works. Posts are only deleted for low quality when they are really terrible. Most bad posts are handled by downvoting by the community, no mods involved. Deciding which posts are bad very often requires domain knowledge, which the mods can't have for every possible topic on SO. SE dropped this new policy on monday, a holiday and it went into effect immediately. They never even mentioned before that they were concerned about false positives here. They could have just asked the mods, explained the concerns and asked them to be more careful. That never happened. The new policy isn't just erring towards avoiding false positives, it is far more extreme than that and prevents almost all cases of AI-generated content from being moderated. There are other concerns like e.g. especially academic sites are strict about considering the use of AI-generated content without declaring it to be plagiarism. Acting on that is now impossible.

by Ukv 3y ago

fabian2k 3y ago

This is essentially a ban on removing AI content, the cases where it is still allowed to remove the posts are exceedingly rare. This is rather confusing as the public policy doesn't contain those details. I'm a moderator on a small SE site, so I have seen the internal communication between SE and the mods on this.

Ukv 3y ago
> This is essentially a ban on removing AI content I think framing it as "a ban on removing AI content" is wrong/misleading and the reason for softwaredoug's question about whether you'd even be allowed to edit low-quality hallucinations. To my understanding you can still remove/edit/ban for all the same reasons as normal content, just that the additional reason (removing for inherently being AI generated) is now significantly stricter. > the cases where it is still allowed to remove the posts are exceedingly rare. Not aware of the internal guidelines unless there's something you're allowed to share, but generally I could understand the admins' desire to err towards high-precision over high-recall.
- fabian2k 3y ago
  This gets into the particulars of how moderation on SO usually works. Posts are only deleted for low quality when they are really terrible. Most bad posts are handled by downvoting by the community, no mods involved. Deciding which posts are bad very often requires domain knowledge, which the mods can't have for every possible topic on SO. SE dropped this new policy on monday, a holiday and it went into effect immediately. They never even mentioned before that they were concerned about false positives here. They could have just asked the mods, explained the concerns and asked them to be more careful. That never happened. The new policy isn't just erring towards avoiding false positives, it is far more extreme than that and prevents almost all cases of AI-generated content from being moderated. There are other concerns like e.g. especially academic sites are strict about considering the use of AI-generated content without declaring it to be plagiarism. Acting on that is now impossible.