4 ms·

How would you prove that?

by sarreph 9mo ago

Cthulhu_ 9mo ago
They don't, hence the suspicion instead of a definite assertion. And suspicions are easy, because what are the consequences if it's false? None. Anyway your comment smells AI generated, I can tell from some of the pixels and seeing quite a few shoops in my time.
Der_Einzige 9mo ago
I don't need to "prove it", because all I have to do is link this: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.01754 https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.01754 https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.01491 https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.01491 https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-short.47/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-short.47/ https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06166 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06166 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wzveh_v1 https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wzveh_v1 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872 https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.987/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.987/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.426/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.426/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.iwsds-1.37/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.iwsds-1.37/ https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.14.24307373v4 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.14.24307373v... https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21522715251379730 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21522715251379... https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.21817 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.21817 Either they used an LLM to write part of it, or the linguistic mind virus infected them and now they speak a little bit like an LLM.
- myrmidon 9mo ago
  Relevant excerpt from your own wiki guideline: "Do not rely too much on your own judgment. [...] if you are an expert user of LLMs and you tag 10 pages as being AI-generated, you've probably falsely accused one editor." Never accuse people of LLM writing based on short comments, your false positive rate is invariably going to be way too high to be acceptable given the very limited material. It's just not worth it: Even if you correctly accuse 9/10 times, you are being toxic to that false positive case for basically no gain.

How would you prove that?

by sarreph 9mo ago

How would you prove that?

They don't, hence the suspicion instead of a definite assertion. And suspicions are easy, because what are the consequences if it's false? None. Anyway your comment smells AI generated, I can tell from some of the pixels and seeing quite a few shoops in my time.

Der_Einzige 9mo ago

I don't need to "prove it", because all I have to do is link this: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.01754 https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.01754 https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.01491 https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.01491 https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-short.47/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.acl-short.47/ https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06166 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.06166 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wzveh_v1 https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/wzveh_v1 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872 https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.987/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.findings-acl.987/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.426/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.coling-main.426/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.iwsds-1.37/ https://aclanthology.org/2025.iwsds-1.37/ https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.14.24307373v4 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.05.14.24307373v... https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21522715251379730 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/21522715251379... https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.21817 https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.21817 Either they used an LLM to write part of it, or the linguistic mind virus infected them and now they speak a little bit like an LLM.

myrmidon 9mo ago
Relevant excerpt from your own wiki guideline: "Do not rely too much on your own judgment. [...] if you are an expert user of LLMs and you tag 10 pages as being AI-generated, you've probably falsely accused one editor." Never accuse people of LLM writing based on short comments, your false positive rate is invariably going to be way too high to be acceptable given the very limited material. It's just not worth it: Even if you correctly accuse 9/10 times, you are being toxic to that false positive case for basically no gain.