Discussion AI Disclaimers

[Scavera]

A reminder btw

And I don't think anyone here has tried to force someone. Just stating opinions.

 

[Brandyn Sal-Soren]

either way it's not about good or bad, just the quality of the posts themselves and whether they contribute to the reader's burnout or not

It is a good and bad situation. Because people are reacting with a justifiable revulsion reflex over AI posting. Which means, to them, it is bad.

Individual on individual basis.
I just drew mine.

Totally fair. And everyone's right.

 

[Scavera]

It is a good and bad situation. Because people are reacting with a justifiable revulsion reflex over AI posting. Which means, to them, it is bad.

I don't think its reflex. People have been living with AI writing long enough now to have matured opinions on it. Brushing away opinions as kneejerk reactions is handwaving them.

 

[Klar]

Big disagree. If someone brings Michelina's to my cookout I'm asking them to leave -- I'd rather them just have not brought anything.

Entirely your right! I think we all curate who we write with for this very reason. You don't invite the sort of person who'd bring Michelina's, and that's totally fine. I don't like to write with Billy Badass soldier guys, by and large, so I don't. We engage with the sort of people we want to engage with and that's the beauty of a freeform forum.

Having a personal boundary for the type of character you write with is totally fine. I absolutely give no pushback on that. I just do not think that it is ethical or even useful to start expecting people to brand themselves with scarlet letters because they use AI, or proofread with AI, or have their posts ghostwritten by a friend because they don't have hands, or use a voice-to-text program that uses AI to fill in the punctuation or however else they put words on the screen to have pretendy-time fun with.

 

[Brandyn Sal-Soren]

I don't think its reflex. People have been living with AI writing long enough now to have matured opinions on it. Brushing away opinions as kneejerk reactions is handwaving them.

I am not brushing it away as a kneejerk reaction. I was merely referencing the emotion of 'disgust' or 'revulsion'. Everyone experiences it around things that they dislike, even once mature opinions have been formed.

Apologies if you took it as an attack. It very much was not.

 

[Scavera]

I am not brushing it away as a kneejerk reaction. I was merely referencing the emotion of 'disgust' or 'revulsion'. Everyone experiences it around things that they dislike, even once mature opinions have been formed.

Apologies if you took it as an attack. It very much was not.

/loving

 

[Kaila Irons]

It is a good and bad situation. Because people are reacting with a justifiable revulsion reflex over AI posting. Which means, to them, it is bad.

You didn't say anything about the posts being bad, you asked:

I use AI to proofread my posts when I am low on time. Does this make me a bad person?

^This question.

My argument is that AI generated posts are bad, I think I've made my reasons clear. I even said that I wasn't gonna waste time bringing morals into this. I really don't think this conversation is about, or should be about the people who use them, but the posts themselves.

I just don't think we should go there right now

 

[Damien Zannen]

I get satisfaction from not knowing how ic interaction goes down or trying to guess what comes next the more surprise the better. Idc if that is flavored organically or synthetic either.

I've used ai for posting before, specifically for intro posts, but its alot of work editing it and it ends up being how Kaila Irons commented earlier.

If a writer wants to disclose ai use then cool, if not then cool but please post so I can get my fix

 

[Ugoto Chivaro]

I'm not asking for or encouraging policy to force people to do it to be clear

I am.

 

[Sophia of House Marr]

Entirely your right! I think we all curate who we write with for this very reason. You don't invite the sort of person who'd bring Michelina's, and that's totally fine. I don't like to write with Billy Badass soldier guys, by and large, so I don't. We engage with the sort of people we want to engage with and that's the beauty of a freeform forum.

Having a personal boundary for the type of character you write with is totally fine. I absolutely give no pushback on that. I just do not think that it is ethical or even useful to start expecting people to brand themselves with scarlet letters because they use AI, or proofread with AI, or have their posts ghostwritten by a friend because they don't have hands, or use a voice-to-text program that uses AI to fill in the punctuation or however else they put words on the screen to have pretendy-time fun with.

This TBH. We're all grown and capable of discerning what we do or don't like...If it rubs you the wrong way? Steer clear.

Even with the best of intentions...This is a no-go. Someone mentioned a "Scarlet Letter" and that's exactly what would happen were this to be implemented. With it simply existing it stirs up the conversation of "this person is writing AI and didn't mark it" which may or may not be true and could negatively impact that writer's experience.

TLDR: Do what's best for you. Avoid when necessary, add a disclaimer if you want to, but try not to put those burdens or expectations on others.

 

[Tefka]

Artists already now have to prove themselves as to not being AI because AI copies their style too much. This is a hobby for people's enjoyment, having to defend yourself from AI accusations would be pretty terrible for a place that's all about vibing and having fun. As is having your writing confidence being absolutely slaughtered by people saying "Clearly this is AI you need to pup up a disclaimer."

Holy fucking based

 

[Vazela]

I said this a few weeks ago in a similar thread. When it comes to this conversation there will always be false positives. This leads to drama, people being bullied and pushed out of communities because of accusations. To be honest staff team should look into making it a rule that false allegations against users will result in bans.

 

[Tefka]

To be honest staff team should look into making it a rule that false allegations against users will result in bans.

i don't care fucking make your allegations lmao

 

[Tefka]

im typing in AI right now you can't stop me

 

[Tefka]

HAHAHAHA THIS IS AI THIS IS AI YOU CANT STOP ME OMG IM USING — EM DASHES — HAHA THIS IS CHATGPT HAHAHA YOU ARE POWERLESS TO STOP THIS

 

[Kitter Bitters]

Personally I think we do this for fun so who cares how we get there? Allowing people to start accusing AI writing is just a step into controlling how other people enjoy this site. That’s a step in the wrong direction.

 

[Darth Virelia]

I have said it, and I'll say it again.

AI tools are getting good at what they do — and they will only get better over time.

Are we going to go around and slap everyone for using a thesaurus because "it wasn't their original idea for the word and instead was tool assisted?"

Yea, witch-hunts are safely avoided by realising that the march of technological progression has already moved past this point — and we might as well adapt to the inevitable future instead of raging against it. You want to drive writers off the site because they have this — in their work?

I still remember in school being told that typing my essays on a computer or sourcing information from the internet was the academic equivalent of a 50-year sentence to jail — by old folks who don't know how to work an Excel spreadsheet.

Now — can you imagine a world where computers are used to speed up our process, even if it means we can't see the individual's handwriting skills? A world where we have a grammar bot spellcheck our work — instead of just living with the mistakes made in the writing?

Oh yea that’s the world we live in.

In 20 years' time — 10 or 5 even — AI is going to continue to improve and improve until it's going to be nigh impossible to distinguish the work.

We can accept the fact we crossed the technological Rubicon and reap the benefits of it — or we can try and destroy the printing press every time someone invents it, because we no longer live in a world where you have to individually create every document.

P.S. I will fucking die on em dash hill.

 

[Scavera]

Grammar checks and the printing press is a far cry from a machine learning algorithm that takes its prose from countless sources.

It’s not genuine.

I’m here to write with people and their own creativity.
If I wanted to write with an AI chat bot I’d go do that myself.

There’s a difference between “I want to interact with a flesh and blood person” and “ye olde scribe who’s upset the printing press stole his job.”

 

[Azurine Varek]

Artists already now have to prove themselves as to not being AI because AI copies their style too much. This is a hobby for people's enjoyment, having to defend yourself from AI accusations would be pretty terrible for a place that's all about vibing and having fun. As is having your writing confidence being absolutely slaughtered by people saying "Clearly this is AI you need to pup up a disclaimer."

I've said this before, but I should say it again:

If I pulled my posts now for Azurine and compared them to the short story series I wrote of her back in 2021, they are frankly very similar (minus the use of em dashes I couldn't figure out how to put into a document until I realized I could make one on my phone easily but in its place I was overusing commas, regular dashes, and semicolons). Sets of three, the "not this, but this" stereotype, epansive description, etc., were all things I used, and continue to use, frequently. Likely because I learned the techniques from the books and stories I liked most. If I had someone accuse me of AI and yelled at or ostrasized for it, especially by the people I love writing with, because of the linguistic styles that I worked with and developed over years I would be devastated.

It's impossible to be certain what is AI and what isn't, and to let something that is supposed to bring joy to people devolve into accusations that would single others out who potentially haven't even done what they're being accused of is the opposite of being a fun hobby.

If you don't like someones style, then don't write with them. Simple as that. Rumors of "X had to be using AI so I don't write with them and I know that because of these things in their writing that are overused that I don't like" are not okay, though. Maybe that person likes the way they add emphasis, using em dashes, or didn't feel the need to reread to catch over used phrases because they typed something up quickly on a break and just wanted to get it out there. Hell, I've seen people make fun of someones use of character thought text or Itallics, so adding AI to that list of possible things to worry about others judging is not the vibe. There's way too much potential for people to start giving false accusations just because they happen to dislike someone for this type of content warning to even be applied.

 

[Tefka]

Grammar checks and the printing press is a far cry from a machine learning algorithm that takes its prose from countless sources.

It’s not genuine.

I’m here to write with people and their own creativity.
If I wanted to write with an AI chat bot I’d go do that myself.

There’s a difference between “I want to interact with a flesh and blood person” and “ye olde scribe who’s upset the printing press stole his job.”

go google "Dead Internet Theory" and buckle in its gonna be an anxiety ridden night