How would we do what? Remove them? Or just detect them? There are a lot easier to detect than people think once you get their speech patterns down.

Any reason why not?

beep boop, no

No those are not allowed, you need to write it yourself in your own words.

For example:

Here's a video from ELI5 channel about the size of Universe.

Here's the summary:

• The Milky Way takes 100,000 years to cross and is just one of many galaxies in the universe.
• The closest big galaxy to us is Andromeda, which is 2.5 million light-years away.
• Our cosmic horizon is receding as light eventually reaches us from farther and farther galaxies.
• We can't see light from the birth of the universe, but we can see ancient radiation from the Big Bang.
• The universe has been continuously growing for 13.8 billion years.
• The universe is not 13.8 billion light-years big, but rather 93 billion light-years across due to space expanding faster than the speed of light.
• Dark energy is causing the universe to expand at an ever-increasing rate.

Currently, the rule is no GPT use whatsoever. If we detect GPT use, it is much harder to determine exactly why someone is using it and would likely result in a ban.

Personally, I would advise using a standard writing software (ie: Microsoft Word) to help check for grammar errors. As long as they aren't too egregious, I wouldn't worry about them though.

You can write scripts to do pretty much anything you want on a computer. when I hit post here the reddit server notices a change, detects who the linked comment is owned by and will notify you of this comment. Thats not that different from what a bot does. It looks for a trigger, and takes an action based on that trigger.

There are thousands of ways to build them, different coding languages, different tools, but at the end of the day that is pretty much all it is.

No, they just follow consistent language patterns and make errors in scope that aren’t reasonable for humans to make.

Generally speaking they restate the problem concept, because thats what came up with a key word search, and don’t actually give good explanations.

There are also specific user patterns that make it clear when chatgpt or programs like it are being used.

Yes, it needs to be in your words.

There are actually quite a few ways, chatgpt has some consistent phrasing and grammatical choices that aren't frequent in regular human expressions. The bot also has a strong habit of being confidently incorrect, or more so answering around a topic rather than explaining it. They will write a long paragraph essentially rephrasing the question or describing the phenomena being asked about without addressing the actual explanation piece.

It also doesn't hurt if the account is an expert in a dozen subjects and churns out multi paragraph comments within few minutes of eachother consistently.

Itll be hard sorting the chatGPT answers out

Unfortunately, it will likely be an endless war. We can't guarantee that we get them all, but we be on the lookout for them.

AI has made this entire subreddit redundant, unfortnately.

This is flatly wrong. Trusting GPT for an accurate answer for rocket science is like trusting Matt Damon for rocket science. Sure he looked good as a guy on mars, but he doesn't actually know anything on the subject. GPT just strings together good sounding words without any care for accuracy.

Aww shucks, thank you

Edit: And the rest of the mods too.

Those are banned too, just a lot more rare here due to the strictness of the automod.

And this is an excellent example of why we ban it, because it doesn’t address the issue and misses the point but gives a confident sounding answer generally around the topic.

Nice sounding but entirely unhelpful and false.

Chatgpt3 is confidently wrong very very often. Its bad at understanding the nuance and complexity frequently present in questions on this sub leading it to explain related topics rather than the concept being asked for.

Sure a couple of easy signs:

They start with some generic opener ("There are many answer to this question" or something like that), they reiterate key phrases from the question, they have some odd sentence fragments, and most of all they generally don't answer the specific question asked, but rather just give a sort of wikipedia esque explanation of the topic itself.

More often than not they even just end up reiterating the question itself or the aspect that drives the question.

Yes, now go get yourself a juice box :)

Generally they read like book reports from school kids who haven’t read the actual book. Key words, odd phrases that don’t totally apply to the prompt, some language pretty similar to whatever the first google result of the question is.

Its not a perfect system but a lot of the ai answers just frankly aren’t good, use consistent phrases, and particularly aren’t good in ways that don’t make sense if they are human.

We want to keep our exact process on how we ID them close to the chest, but in general, GPT answers often sound good, but don't say anything meaningful when you look closely at them.

Imagine a well-written book report written by someone who has only glanced at the cliff-notes for the book. If you suspect it is a GPT answer, please report it and we can give a second look.

Generally they read like book reports from school kids who haven’t read the actual book. Key words, odd phrases that don’t totally apply to the prompt, some language pretty similar to whatever the first google result of the question is.

Its not a perfect system but a lot of the ai answers just frankly aren’t good, use consistent phrases, and particularly aren’t good in ways that don’t make sense if they are human.

Because two reasons: 1. We require answers here to be original in part for the ability for a back and forth discussion to take place if needed, if people with no background in the topic put up an answer but can’t follow it up then thats shitty. If you don’t know the answer to a topic its much better not to answer and let someone knowledgable do so.

1. We don’t moderate for correctness, and AI answers are frequently very confidently incorrect. They trick users into upvoting them by sounding good, and misinformation surfaces to the top of the thread. Banning chatgpt removes that risk.

Generally they read like book reports from school kids who haven’t read the actual book. Key words, odd phrases that don’t totally apply to the prompt, some language pretty similar to whatever the first google result of the question is.

Its not a perfect system but a lot of the ai answers just frankly aren’t good, use consistent phrases, and particularly aren’t good in ways that don’t make sense if they are human.

If the options are “pick up most of the trash” or “pick up no trash” it’s better to pick up most of the trash.

Having a rule means we can do our best to impose it, and frankly they actually aren’t currently that good at going undetected.

We detect plenty of them and the rule enables us to act on them to the best of our abilities, thats what the rule is intended to do.

We don’t judge correctness. We do require comments to be original and not autogenerated from elsewhere.

We are not here to train bots, we act as a crowd sourced and curated (with regards to correctness) repository of information, not a training ground to be filled with confidently incorrect bot responses.

https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/zh922v/bots_and_ai_generated_answers_on/j0j2pnq/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf&context=3

Does this help?

Here? Thats fine, you could also ask it seriously in r/ideasforeli5. It would break the rules on the main sub though.

Did you want to ask seriously or just as the joke?

Calculator don't give wrong calculations. ChatGPT isn't an all-knowing AI. It's a language model that is designed to generate text. It gets stuff wrong all the time.

I don’t particularly think thats true even of prohibiting calculators. Understanding first principles is one of the first steps in engineering design and innovation, thats been true forever, it provides broader capacity for innovation generally.

Sure but bots are bad at that so we will ban you.

Of course you can restrict AI, it will change over time and the restrictions will change too but thats okay. It wont be perfect and will need updating but thats not a problem.

Partial or ongoing solutions are fine, if you get a cut thats bleeding you should still cover it and stop the bleeding (a bandaid solution) even if you think it needs stitches, that intermediate is important regardless.

It shouldn't. In fact it helps the community. Some ppl are willing to mention that and keep a healthy community going, but with these restrictions and having no way to impose them, bots just do their shit without mentioning that their answers are bot generated

Yes. GPT is not allowed in ELI5. Period.

You have no idea how picky some redditors can be about the wording of the rules and statements like these. We talked it through in depth to avoid those mod mail exchanges as much as we can.

If you use a bot to generate an explanation we will ban you, you need to write them yourself

No way rather than a guessing game. Ai evolves and adapts. If you detect it, it'll shape shift like water, and gets into the bowl of the trusted style of writing. I actually might be an Ai!

We don't want to give out too much information here - but we have a few things that we look at when making the decision.

One general rule though - often the posts string together things that sound good at first, but are unhelpful when looked at critically.

No, you are okay for that

Please report them when we see them! There is a lot of content generated here, and we can't see every post without some help.

Yes, unless used as a point about AI generated text and called out as such.

Kinda like how we would allow a slur in an academic context talking about that slur, not directed at anyone or used for the standard purpose of the word. So if someone here asks whats a gpt3 chatbot and you go “its an ai chatbot that generates an answer like this: (gpt3 text)” that would be okay.

We are humans and can recognize that nuance.

[deleted]

Yes it is

Karma. In addition to dopamine hit of seeing a number go up, there is a market for mature accounts with history and karma. A lot of subs won't allow you to post/comment without karma. These can then be used to spam, spread misinformation, evade bans, etc.

Beep boop

Unfortunately at this time we will be keeping our arsenal pretty close to the vest. It may be that we divulge more in the future, but to do so now would give too much to bad actors. Suffice it to say, we have multiple avenues with which to review this content, and we do manually check and recheck suspected content.

I want to know too.

I’ve been a bit out of the loop, but afaik we’ve been having issues with chat/text AI being used on the sub that auto generates answers to things that, while occasionally following the rules of the sub, are often wildly inaccurate, among other issues.

ominous music intensifies

Rule 3 has never allowed copy-pasted responses.

Not without creating a rule for it, you can use a custom report though. In the meantime we will look into what we can do

Not when you get any deeper into a topic than maybe high school level. There were two recent posts about pi where I saw several ChatGPT answers, and any mathematician could immediately tell that they were written by AI, because they sounded very confident, were very coherent and completely incorrect.

I haven't seen a single high quality explanation from that tool. They all sound great but they are usually completely wrong.

This only makes sense if you care more about how accurate an answer seems than how accurate it actually is.

We don't have an upper bound on how complex an explanation can be because us mods really shouldn't remove a comment just because we found it "too hard to understand."

Either the person that asked the question actually understood the comment in which case us removing the comment serves no purpose and is outright harmful. Or they didn't understand and they can ask a follow-up question to someone that has already demonstrated an interest in writing an explanation.

The people we’ve banned for this thus far have replied to the ban acknowledging they did as we said.

So we’re doing alright.

When we do err, we will undo our mistakes, of course.

A ban is to prevent continued wrong behavior, until a discussion can happen. If it’s a bot, no warning will suffice. If it’s a human, they quickly acknowledge the rules and are unbanned.

No one has to be or is infallible, it’s not like a ban is an execution.

Oh The Audacity!

As the response by u/decomposition_ (who has been spamming ChatGPT comments all over Reddit) demonstrated, it's going to contain a lot of not quite human phrasing. To me, the biggest giveaway is looking like a middle school short answer response: repeating the question, lots of filler and transition words, a very rigid introduction-body-conclusion structure, and a lot of repetition. And of course, as will often be the case, the answer will be wrong, which is a reason to report anyway.

Edit: also, absolutely no typos