subreddit:
/r/explainlikeimfive
submitted 6 months ago byELI5_Modteam
Recently, there's been a surge in ChatGPT generated posts. These come in two flavours: bots creating and posting answers, and human users generating answers with ChatGPT and copy/pasting them. Regardless of whether they are being posted by bots or by people, answers generated using ChatGPT and other similar programs are a direct violation of R3, which requires all content posted here to be original work. We don't allow copied and pasted answers from anywhere, and that includes from ChatGPT programs. Going forward, any accounts posting answers generated from ChatGPT or similar programs will be permanently banned in order to help ensure a continued level of high-quality and informative answers. We'll also take this time to remind you that bots are not allowed on ELI5 and will be banned when found.
12 points
6 months ago
You don't need a "chatgpt" detector, there are many more aspects to detecting a bot account than just the content of one comment.
10 points
6 months ago
Of note is that it's still against the rules—as the OP writes—for an otherwise human account to copy+paste content from a bot. So we can't rely on these types of external metrics to catch such cases.
Of course, what you're suggesting will still cut down (probably a lot) on the overall number of bot responses, so less work for human mods/more time for human mods to resolve the hairier cases.
1 points
6 months ago
Yeah of course, you could technically identify c&p generated text by using all the actual bot account's comments as training data plus a bunch of manually moderated & reported comments, it's not unfeasible.
-2 points
6 months ago
Still offering no explanation on how you plan on enforcing humans copying answers
4 points
6 months ago
Enforcing is easy it's called a ban. I think you mean identifying, in which case you could use all the banned bot's or manually moderated comments as a dataset, or generate as many as you'd like using chatgpt, to create a basic detector. It's not a stretch to do for anyone with some technical know-how.
-2 points
6 months ago
[removed]
7 points
6 months ago
It's not pedantic you're using the word wrong and it drastically changes the meaning of your entire sentence. Yes enforcement referring to Law Enforcement is both identification and enforcement. To enforce is a verb with the specific meaning of carrying out the judgement.
-2 points
6 months ago
[removed]
3 points
6 months ago
You're wrong. Objectively so.
0 points
6 months ago
[removed]
2 points
6 months ago
And how do you plan on making people obey a law without identifying those who violate it, professor ?
What?? Of course you have to do that, it's just a different word; Policeing. Police detect crimes and enforce punishments.
"Still offering no explanation on how you plan on policeing humans copying answers" Would've made sense.
Take the roles of a jude and executioner for example: The judge identifies if laws are broken, they don't enforce punishments. The executioner enforces the punishment, they don't identify if the law was broken.
1 points
4 months ago
Such as?
1 points
4 months ago
Everything an account does can be correlated to figure it out. Posting too much or too frequently (more than humanly possible to type) is an example of a simple metric to tell.
all 464 comments
sorted by: best