If these “signs of AI writing” are merely linguistic, good for them. This is as accurate as a lie detector (i.e., not accurate) and nobody should use this for any real world decision-making.
The real signs of AI writing are not as easy to fix as just instructing an LLM to “read” an article to avoid them.
As a teacher, all of my grading is now based on in person performances, no tech allowed. Good luck faking that with an LLM. I do not mind if students use an LLM to better prepare for class and exams. But my impression so far is that any other medium (e.g., books, youtube explanation videos) leads to better results.
I sucked in oral exams and therefore hated them. Then again, if they had been mixed into regular school, it might not have sucked so much.
Doesn’t need to be oral, I remember occasionally having exams that were essay questions that needed to be answered in class.
I do both of these as well as smaller but more frequent tests, group work, project work over several sessions etc… The only things I stopped doing are reports to write at home, paper summaries etc. Doesn’t make sense anymore.
Bro isnt even gonna check its output anyway.
How likely is the list to be AI generated as well?
Congrats on inventing what high school students figured out a year ago to skirt AI homework detectors.
Wikipedia is one of the last genuine places on the Internet, and these rat bastards are trying to contaminate that, too
Wikipedia just sold the rights to use Wikipedia for AI training to Microsoft and openai…
I mean it’s free money, why not?
How exactly does that work? Wikipedia does not “own” the content on the website, it’s all CC-BY licensed.
Yeah, they’re selling the work of others. That’s how the site always worked. This venture into “AI” is nothing new.
The BY term is not respected by LLMs
So? Still doesn’t make sense to me that wikipedia can sell anything meaningful here, but I’m also not a lawyer. Do they promise not to sue them or sell them some guarantee that contributors also can’t sue them? Is it just some symbolic PR washing?
Why? Wikipedia has like a decade of operating expenses on hand, so they don’t need the money
I just love how people just shit “facts” out of their ass while citing zero sources and people will just believe them and upvote because it confirms their bias.
This number inflates every time I read it. First it was ten years of hosting cost. Then it’s operating costs. Soon it will be ten years of the entire US GDP.
I’d believe they have ten years of hosting costs on hand.
My quick googling says they have 170m in assets and all 180m in annual operating costs. Give or take.
Greed? It’s probably greed.
It’s a non-profit foundation with the majority being volunteers. If greed was the case one then would have to ask is why not just go ahead and inject ads
OK then why sell data right to m$?
Well as mentioned Wikipedia seems to be in the red and not making enough donations to pay for the expenses. So maybe the foundation is thinking it would help with the deficit.
Also chances are Microsoft will instruct Co-Pilot to prioritize Wikipedia whenever it scours the internet for information.
Think it like that eye rolling Google paying Firefox to be the default search engine deal.
Well as mentioned Wikipedia seems to be in the red
They keep saying that… at least when they’re asking for more money.
Is wiki in the red? Unclear, omi mean they ask for money donations, but someone in this thread claims they are set for a decade, I’ve seen people post something about how they are fine, and even donate a bunch themselves. I don’t know, and I guess it doesn’t matter.
Not sure where you are going with your second comment, and uninterested in engaging with your comparison as I don’t think it’s very good
I am referring to the reply comment from surewhynotlem. They say that cost is 180 million while Wikipedia has 170 million on hand. That is a 10 million deficit.
While probably not enough to shut down the site it is still operating in the red.
Where I was going is explaining how it’s possibly not greed. Just the foundation looking for another revenue source that theoretically would not ruin the site.
That alt being a deal that gets Wikipedia more traffic
If microsoft is “buying access to training data” it makes what Open AI is doing look illegal. I would encourage every data broker to sell 'AI training data rights" because it undermines the only real advantage AI has and it helps pave the way to forcing AI companies to comply with open source licenses.
Essentially selling ai data rights is a trojan horse for the AI companies. Obviously it would be better to pass laws but until that happens this is imo a better strategy than doing nothing.
I mean, what open ai is doing and did should be illegal if it’s not, in my opinion.
Download an offline copy while you still can.
what are the best ways to do it while still having practical access?
Here’s a link to the Kiwix library download for all of Wikipedia. It’s 111GB though, so you’ll need a lot of space and also a lot of time to wait for it to download.
Note, you’ll also need Kiwix in some manner to read the zim file once it’s downloaded.
Kiwix library - All of Wikipedia - direct download link
But this’ll let you have a local copy you can reference should actual Wikipedia ever get ruined by GenAI, or worse, get taken down by hostile governments.
sounding like a great app for my server!
Fuck you, Siqi Chen.
In French, one of the way to spot AI writing is that sentences will often miss articles or have bad grammar. Can this dude also ask the LLM to include more articles and make complete sentences in the language it’s trying to imitate?
I was using the Discover feed on my phone but Google started to insert rewritten stories & headlines by AI and they were so annoyingly bad at making simple sentences in French that it made me stop using that thing.
We’d rather the dude kill the LLM entirely. No one needs that shit
In French, one of the way to spot AI writing is that sentences will often miss articles or have bad grammar.
Je suis AI?
Nice try, LLM. In French, it’s probably spelled “IA” (for “intelligence artificiel”), like basically every other originally english acronym. /j
Nice try, LLM.
I think you mean GML
Weird, in Italian they usually have impeccable grammar
The most recent one I saw was “Neige cause ralentissement de REM”. It works translated in English, giving something like “Snow causes slowing down of REM”, but in French it’s missing enough articles to sound wrong. The cromulent sentence would have been “La neige cause le/un ralentissement du REM”. Back into English this would add “The snow causes the/a slowing down of the REM”. A missing “le/la”, or using “de” instead of “du” doesn’t change the meaning of a sentence, but it makes it obvious that it wasn’t from a native speaker.
Maybe it depends on the model and the source but so far, in French, for news, most of what I’ve read becomes uncanny after a few sentences. They often read like something passed through a translation program but just a tad better. You can understand it fine but it’s missing an article there, reversing the word order in another sentence, uses vocabulary that is just slightly off, and often ends up like something written by someone that learned French as a second language for most of their life. A very good learner, nearly native level, but not quite there yet and still a bit off.
It can’t avoid doing those things. That’s the reason for the article.
Really hope to see the day that they get marched off to the gas chambers. They’ve not only given their humanity away, theyre trying to take it from us too.
I hate AI as much as the next guy, but what the actual fuck?!
Who in the fuck is the they you are referring to?
Killing people en masse for being fucking morons is not as good of a take as you think it is.
Wikipedia is astroturfed BS for anything remotely politically related.
Useful if you want to learn about the Ivory-billed Woodpecker or a closed-cycle regenerative heat engine, etc…
So no politics and subjects with political implications such as history.That’s what prolewiki is for
I trust no one with my history or geopolitics but ML’s.
Most informed, well read and thorough people on the planet
It’s really “strange” how people have this delusional viewpoint of wikipedia as neutral, honest, etc.
I guess it seems fine if you’ve got lib politics completely within the hegemonic narrative.
The point is you can check the citations to validate. It can be poisoned by wuzzles but you can discover that with just a bit of effort checking the citations.
AI slope
tan(Ai)
You do understand this is more akin to white hat testing, right?
Those who want to exploit this will do it anyway, except they won’t publish the result. By making the exploit public, the risk will be known if not mitigated.
I’m admittedly not knowledgeable in White Hat Hacking, but are you supposed to publicize the vulnerability, release a shortcut to exploit it telling people to ‘enjoy’, or even call the vulnerability handy ?
Responsible disclosure is what a white hat does. You report the bug to whomever is the party responsible for patching and give them time to fix it.
That sort of depends on the situation. Responsible disclosure is for if there is some relevant security hole that is an actual risk to businesses and people, while this here is just “haha look LLMs can now better pretend to write good text if you tell it to”. That’s not really responsible disclosurable. It’s not even specific to one singular product.
Considering the “vulnerability” here is on the level of “don’t use
passwordas your password” - yeah, releasing it all is exactly the right step.
So they are using AI to make it so AI can’t detect that they are using AI?
What kind of technological ouroborous of nonsense is this?
It gets better. Using llm’s to check if the output of an llm is hallucinated or not! They call it a judge and its funny as hell tbh
Magic
Jesus Christ what a wretched twit of a man.
From the repo:
Have opinions. Don’t just report facts - react to them. “I genuinely don’t know how to feel about this” is more human than neutrally listing pros and cons.
That will at least be easy to spot in a Wikipedia entry.
lol brilliant
