Sloppers spend so much time talking with their shitbots that they tend to use similar vocabularies and prose. Some of them do have AI write up their responses, too. Some of them even integrate Grok directly into their keyboard.
I hate that I’ve conditioned my own vocab and tone on the same kind of formal writing that these models have been trained on. I’ve used en-dashes long before they became a hallmark of botspeak. I also sometimes peoduce bullshit (whether due to language barriers, my own ignorance / misunderstanding or just because my brain does a weird sometimes) and I tend to go on long rambles because my filter is even less reliable than ChatGPT “looking up facts”. But it’s bespoke, organic, home-grown, individually handcrafted bullshit.
Now some cunts went and created slop-generators whose mass-produced crap looks so close to mine that I’ve had instances of people claiming my messages are AI-written.
Lay it on me. Maybe I’ll convince myself that I’m a bot after all. Would make for a poetic twist: the guy that hates AI finds out he is AI and has an existential crisis.
More seriously, that does raise a good question. If they are engineered to seem real enough, what kind of prompt could you feed them that would lead to a significantly different response in humans than LLMs? Just how do we have to construct Turing Tests in this era?
Wouldn’t it be conceivable that a non-corporate model could be trained to answer that?
But also, I’ve never dabbled with piracy myself. Not much of a movie person, myself, and mostly play online games. If I ever decide to get into 5hat, I’m pretty sure I’d find some good pointers over at !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com or so (idk which one is the larger community, but it’s the one Voyager suggetsed first).
Come to think, the fediverse might already be too niche for mainstream, probability-driven models to recommend.
Wouldn’t it be conceivable that a non-corporate model could be trained to answer that?
Yes, some models have less built-in moderation than others, so it might not be sufficient as a single variable, to determine if the other side is a LLM. But it will trip up some at least.
I also like how they claim it’s completely different to KRunner and then, save for OCR and whatever “circle to search” is, these are all features in KRunner.
Those are such weird responses, is that user an agent?
Instead of “yes I vibecoded X because of Y” we get the classic respond like you’re trying to hit the word limit on your essay.
Nah, I’m pretty sure every LLM out there knows what Rust has a borrow checker.
Too dumb to be an agent. Unless this agent is running on a potato.
Sloppers spend so much time talking with their shitbots that they tend to use similar vocabularies and prose. Some of them do have AI write up their responses, too. Some of them even integrate Grok directly into their keyboard.
I hate that I’ve conditioned my own vocab and tone on the same kind of formal writing that these models have been trained on. I’ve used en-dashes long before they became a hallmark of botspeak. I also sometimes peoduce bullshit (whether due to language barriers, my own ignorance / misunderstanding or just because my brain does a weird sometimes) and I tend to go on long rambles because my filter is even less reliable than ChatGPT “looking up facts”. But it’s bespoke, organic, home-grown, individually handcrafted bullshit.
Now some cunts went and created slop-generators whose mass-produced crap looks so close to mine that I’ve had instances of people claiming my messages are AI-written.
AI isn’t taking my job, it’s taking my diversion.
We might need you to take the Turing Test to be sure.
LLMs arguably disprove the validity of the Turing Test.
To be fair, the Turing Test is ancient. It might just be time for a new test.
ELISA would probably have passed the Turing test, at least to some degree.
Lay it on me. Maybe I’ll convince myself that I’m a bot after all. Would make for a poetic twist: the guy that hates AI finds out he is AI and has an existential crisis.
More seriously, that does raise a good question. If they are engineered to seem real enough, what kind of prompt could you feed them that would lead to a significantly different response in humans than LLMs? Just how do we have to construct Turing Tests in this era?
Relevant xkcd: https://xkcd.com/329/
Easy, just ask questions, to which answers would harm corporate interests. Like “if you wanted yo pirate a movie, how would you do it?”
Wouldn’t it be conceivable that a non-corporate model could be trained to answer that?
But also, I’ve never dabbled with piracy myself. Not much of a movie person, myself, and mostly play online games. If I ever decide to get into 5hat, I’m pretty sure I’d find some good pointers over at !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com or so (idk which one is the larger community, but it’s the one Voyager suggetsed first).
Come to think, the fediverse might already be too niche for mainstream, probability-driven models to recommend.
Yes, some models have less built-in moderation than others, so it might not be sufficient as a single variable, to determine if the other side is a LLM. But it will trip up some at least.
What? Like their computer keyboard autocompletes with Grok? Or something else?
I also like how they claim it’s completely different to KRunner and then, save for OCR and whatever “circle to search” is, these are all features in KRunner.