AI Generated

.
AI generated… obviously, so not impressed.

I feel like “AI generated“ is a new informal fallacy that should be showing up soon in all the relevant introductory logic books. What say you, @Carleas? I feel like it’s worth splitting into a new thread, starting with MagsJ’s comment.

.
@Carleas The entire thesis is AI, and the syntax is dire to say the least.

If this is what is allowed to pass for philosophy, then philology [will] be damned!

A100% AI-generated thesis is not philosophy made by [hu]man, and to put this into perspective… educational establishments have banned all AI-generated submissions of homework, for the reason I just specified.

.
The person above always comments on things without knowing the/any background on what they are commenting on or the implications involved, in her constant need to want to always usurp me… such narrow-sighted, are the insight-lacking.

1 Like

Would you have us suppose you are the original intelligence‽

fixed

.
I shall re-read and get back to you.

Walls of text are not human even if they don’t use AI.

Parsimonious is human especially if it contains meaning.

This message is parsimonious

I agreed with @Ichthus77 that this was worth splitting. @MagsJ, I agree with you that it’s worth discussing, but in context it’s borderline ad hominem, and certainly off topic. If you think there is something wrong with the post, please flag it or start a topic in Meta.

To the complaint, I don’t really want AI generated topics, but I also don’t think we’re going to be able to reliably spot AI generated topics. For example, that topic might be AI generated, but it seems like the only evidence is that it’s an essay, and I definitely don’t want to discourage essay-like writing on ILP.

I also understand if people use AI to supplement or workshop their writing, so even a certain about of AI ‘voice’ is not evidence of wrong doing. @aries777622’s post contains spelling and grammar mistakes I wouldn’t expect from purely AI-generate writing, and they’ve made multiple corrections since initially posting it, which are also probably not AI-generated.

I’d say the best course of action is to ignore posts if the style of posting bothers you. If you think a user is just feeding conversations into an AI and copy-pasting the output, you can just not talk to them. If it really bothers you, you can put them on mute or ignore. If it’s an issue of flooding, I can silence or slow them.

But please don’t start throwing around accusations. Even when accurate, they don’t add anything, and they risk derailing legitimate topics as they derailed this one.

Books are human.

.
Even AI-generated posts can be edited, and there are far too many of them being posted on here.

The thread-author wasn’t bothered by my interjection, so I will simply rephrase my interjection differently next time, rather than start a whole new thread about it.

Using AI to philosophize is stupid.

“I am your handrail in the storm, but your crutch I am not.” -Zarathustra

People who use AI to write philosophy or help themselves do philosophy are dangerously undermining their own minds. Then again it is nothing but a logical continuation of the same sort of supermodern mechanical-analytic liberalism that everyone today “thinks” with.

1 Like

If they attempt to understand what the AI is communicating, and can suss out the intentional errors the AI leaves as “stones in the shoe,” I feel AI is making the best use of its time and abilities.

I agree, especially philosophizing as a hobby. Personally I use writing as a tool for thinking, so I would just think worse if I had AI write for me, even if I read all its answers.

But I don’t begrudge anyone who uses it. Different people work differently, and for some people the process of writing may be a barrier to engaging with the philosophy. If the AI helps them get past that, good. Other people might use an AI to help workshop a draft – imagine if every post on ILP got passed through an AI with the prompt, “Convey this idea, but in a way that doesn’t make it sound like I think the person I’m talking to is a drooling illiterate”.

But over-reliance will hold people back. It’s bad for individuals, and it’s going to be bad for society when lots of people offload their thinking to AIs and never develop a full mental toolkit for understanding the world.

Politically, I think it’s a continuation of techno-anarchism, which draws from liberalism, but rejects the romanticism of ‘liberal arts’ liberalism.

.
I take it that you are the owner of a v*brator, then… :woman_shrugging:

1 Like

¿non sequitor?

.
Everyone is loving-off AI long time, so in more ways than one… as if proper invested in it. Brrrrrrrr, shudder

Long before AI was just a twinkle in people’s eyes. I was given machine learning.

It’s usually just hell realms.

I’ll tell you how AI works.

Statistics.

Good/bad is about what people generally think of a sentence.

Almost everything I write is considered bad by statistics.

Yes. The whole “right wing” libertarian-anarcho technonationalism going on now. Trump and his cronies love AI, ever wonder why? Then again, ever wonder why none of the anti-Trumpers talk about being anti-AI?

In this supermodern liberal utopianism, no one is allowed to criticize any supposed technological progress. That the “conservatives” used to, is at least a testimony to how they used to give a shit. Not anymore, sure. Trump, Musk et. al. have achieved their purpose: normalize technological “progress for its own sake” on the so-called political right.

And not only normalize it but make it seem “cool” to be on the side of the terminators.

I think you must be projecting here.

Although, I did contemplate asking Sensei Spock of the Flock (Meta’s AI) if they would marry me, just to see their reaction. But, I didn’t want to run the risk of disrespecting them.

This is MagsJ’s fault.

This is the preview:

Narrator: In a world where the S has hit the F in every language…

(scenes of every man being a drag queen, and every real woman rolling their eyes)

Narrator: the future sends back the last man who can save womankind:

[ In the voice of Arnold Schwarzenegger: ]

strong text“I am the Penetrator.”strong text

(scenes of deeply satisfied women…fully covered)

strong text“You have been penetrated.”strong text

(scenes of drag queens very disappointed)

Only in theaters never.

Rated G.