Apparently, my requirements for Bad Stuff are the same as my requirements for Saucy Stuff.

If I trust you, if it’s more than just an excuse to roll combat dice with your big ol combatty combat combatter, and if it contributes to the game/character’s story rather than detracts or distracts from it.

Real talk, though, my characters are often designed to fail. They aspire to power, authority, etc, etc, but I’m lazy and very busy RL so I don’t want power, authority, or anything more than a cup of tea. If you can help me tell that story in a satisfying way? I’m yours forever.

@somasatori Or even if you do recognise those as “problems,” it reads more like the typical wannabe Wordsworth or Hemingway crap that I attempt whenever I get too big for my britches.

One of my therapy clients, a survivor of intense domestic violence, specifically wants to keep seeing me because I’m a good man.

Fuck, man. Just… fuck.

@Third-Eye said in AI In Poses:

I also really cringe at ‘vibes man’ becoming the way to figure this out, though, because I see some people spot ‘AI’ and I think they’re wrong, have terrible instincts, and are fixating on stuff I don’t think is relevant.

The number of times I’ve seen people on social media assert that something is “clearly AI” simply because it is a thing they themselves have never said or seen is astonishing. I can’t imagine it being any better when it’s something important, like the RP they’re presently having.

@Faraday All COBOL knowledge is held exclusively by two men, both called Steve. They’re not allowed to travel at the same time, to avoid the risk of all worldly knowledge of COBOL being lost in the same incident.

@dvoraen And somehow someone still needs to know COBOL.

@Hobbie said in AI Megathread:

tl;dr if you let dumb AI learn from dumb AI, AI gets dumber.

So now I should put my poses through all the LLMs, and eventually they’ll break!

@Yam Something like “Using LLMs/AI for any contributions to the game, including but not limited to backgrounds, descriptions, wiki images, poses, etc, is a bannable offence. Being a dick if you suspect someone of using LLMs/AI is also a bannable offence.”

Regardless of whether I agree (morally, ethically, whatever) with the use of AI, out in the real world I can understand it: You want to make a buck, get a grade, or otherwise achieve something that’s difficult with as little effort as possible. I get that.

But… creativity and writing are the entire goddamn point(s) of the kind of RP we do. If you want to use Grammarly or something like that to catch typos and comma placement, that’s totally fine, but to use an LLM to do the creative bit is so alien an idea to me that I’d probably never even suspect a person of doing it. I’d probably just think they’re boring, or ESL, or ESL and boring.

IIRC @Tez did have some issue with player(s) using AI for stuff over on that there Demon (and others) game they ran. Their input might be warranted here too, if we’re having a sensible conversation about it.

@Trashcan said in AI Megathread:

No one is advocating for completely disconnecting your brain while making any judgment

I know that. You know that. But people are idiots and will entirely defer to an authority. Education is always ten years behind technology, and laws are fifteen years behind that.

@Faraday said in AI Megathread:

IMHO we need structural change.

Agreed. It’s fundamentally not even really an “AI” problem at its core, but a sort of “humans relying on authorities instead of thinking” problem.

@Faraday said in AI Megathread:

Until some article points out that semicolons also occur more often in AI-generated work than in the average (non-professional) writing, and you’re right back where you’ve started.

I don’t like this game anymore.

@Trashcan said in AI Megathread:

What would you consider an acceptable scale?

Honestly? More mediums. Media. Whichever. Essays, academic papers, hell even clinical notes. The kinds of writing that will really easily look like AI to anyone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

But ultimately, it doesn’t even matter if the tool is very nearly perfect. Many people in many settings, even professional ones, won’t run text through a detector, they’ll look at some shitty guide on the internet and declare something to be AI or not. It’s ultimately a human problem, not a detector problem – they’re going to believe what they want to believe and the detection software will be evidence for them either way: “The detector works perfectly without flaws or errors,” when it agrees with them, and “the detector is easily fooled and full of problems and my brain is better” when it disagrees.

Because we’ve still got stupid old people making stupid old people decisions based on metrics from stupid old people times, like the 70s.

@somasatori said in AI Megathread:

People have recently assumed that I was using AI (not great for clinical writing) and thus everything is over-parenthized. Over-parenthesesed?

I’ve started using semicolons more in my notes:

Client reported improved sleep this week — though still experiencing early-morning waking when stressed.
vs
Client reported improved sleep this week; still experiencing early-morning waking when stressed.

@MisterBoring Either @Roz or @Aria explained… somewhere up in the higher reaches of this thread. I got a cramp trying to scroll that far.

@Trashcan said in AI Megathread:

This is not true; people who are very familiar with AI-generated text can identify it accurately 90% of the time without any access to ‘comparative’ sources.

“Person very familiar with Vermeer easily spots forgery” is not a surprise. I was speaking about the general population, who are not very familiar with AI-generated text.

Those studies you quoted, while potentially promising, are very small in scale. Another study has indicated that if English isn’t your first language, there’s a higher chance of your work being pulled up as having been written by AI.

@Trashcan said in AI Megathread:

the odds of someone familiar with AI output identifying a piece of writing as suspect and putting it through two different commercial AI detectors

This part, though, is the most bemusing though. The odds of someone familiar with AI output putting it through two different commercial AI detectors in the real world are almost laughably small, in my experience. Academic institutions and non-tech companies aren’t going to fork out for two bits of software that do roughly the same thing, they’re going to go with whomever has the shiniest advertising budget.

@Roz Having two kinds of dashes is dumb.

And this is the part where I leave so Roz can’t em dash my brains against the rocks.

It’s markdown: dashdash is en, dashdasdash is em.

Test–test
Test—test

Test – test
Test — test

@Trashcan That footnote is giving me flashbacks to a stand-up argument I had with one of my educators when I was a wee lad (of around 19?) where I held the view that the Oxford comma is never optional. Academic arguments are weird, man. I was/am right, though.

@Aria said in AI Megathread:

You should be–if you know how to use them properly–leaving no spaces between the dash and the word

That is a style guide difference.

ETA: At least it used to be, I haven’t checked recently. But when I was first coming up in the Professional Writing Arena we used some bastardised variant of AP style that required a space between. It also did weird shit with ellipses that I didn’t approve of.