As a child and teen, lacking any talent for foreign languages, I was completely unable to learn English in spite of its being taught to me every single year from first grade in primary school until fifth grade in secondary school. Until I was 21, I couldn't speak English at all and barely understood what was spoken in English language movies. I thereafter learned alone through forcing myself to read English books I was interested in that were not yet translated into French, and looking up every third word in an English-to-French dictionary. Ever since, I've always struggled to construct English sentences and make proper use of punctuation, prepositions and marks of the genitive. — Pierre-Normand
Oftentimes, I simply ask GPT-4 to rewrite what I wrote in better English, fixing the errors and streamlining the prose. I have enough experience reading good English prose to immediately recognise that the output constitutes a massive improvement over what I wrote without, in most cases, altering the sense or my communicative intentions in any meaningful way. The model occasionally substitutes a better word of phrase for expressing what I meant to express. It is those last two facts that most impress me. — Pierre-Normand
I've thought about how I might have used it if it was around while I was still working. — T Clark
Quick question, do you find that different languages shape the way you feel? — frank
Any competent and reflective practitioner of English will define plagiarism as something like: deliberate or negligent misattribution of authorship.
Authorship tends to have unclear cases as well as clear ones. So does deliberateness or negligence with respect to this criterion.
But show me a case of unacknowledged chat-bot-assisted writing that isn't a perfectly clear case of plagiarism by this definition? — bongo fury
I'd want an AI that can take schematic diagrams as input, and produce schematics as output, before I could see an AI as highly useful for my work. — wonderer1
Not surprising, as marketing-speak is probably the most annoying, uninspired, and aesthetically ugly verbal trash to be imposed on the human mind up until AI LLMs offering it some competition. — Baden
What types of schematic diagrams do you mean? — Christoffer
I think LLMs are already more capable of producing scripts for marketing that offers a language that doesn't come off as out of touch with reality or tone-deaf. Copywriters for big corporations trying to "talk" to their customer base usually sounds like aliens trying to communicating with the human race. That LLMs are more capable of finding the correct tone and language to sound closer to their customers seems rather ironic. — Christoffer
But show me a case of unacknowledged chat-bot-assisted writing that isn't a perfectly clear case of plagiarism by this definition?
— bongo fury
How does that lead to such a clear conclusion? — Christoffer
You're talking more about the philosophy of authorship and not specifically plagiarism as a legal phenomena. And it's in court where such definitions will find their final form. — Christoffer
Someone using it to generate an entire text might not be the author, — Christoffer
Just asking the LLM to do all the work is a clear case, but this is not the best use of LLMs for text generation and not really how it's used by those actually using it as a tool. — Christoffer
You need to define in what intended use-case of an LLM you attribute to making plagiarism, is operating in. — Christoffer
And also include a comparison to how a humans process available information into their own text and when that person is stepping over into plagiarism. — Christoffer
What happens when a human accidentally produces exact copies of sentences from memory, without even knowing that they do so? — Christoffer
How does that differ? — Christoffer
Add to that the improvements of LLMs and the future scenario in which LLMs have become better than humans at not copying training data text directly and always providing citation when referencing direct information. — Christoffer
And if the systems start to operate better than humans at avoiding plagiarism and using these models as assistive tools might even help avoid accidental plagiarism, what then? — Christoffer
In the end, the plagiarism will be attributed to the human, not the machine. — Christoffer
Or should we blame the computer of plagiarism for the use of CTRL+C, CTRL+V and not the human inputting that intention? — Christoffer
Can you, or can't you? — bongo fury
You're waffling. I'm talking about a common sense understanding of plagiarism as warned about in typical forum guidelines. — bongo fury
You don't say. — bongo fury
Asking anything or anybody for advice on formulating and expressing ideas, or on refining and redrafting a text, is perfectly clearly plagiarism if unacknowledged. — bongo fury
Apparently my definition leaves you without a counter example, so no I don't. — bongo fury
Not while the cases are clear. — bongo fury
That human is mortified, and hopes not to be judged deliberate or negligent in their error. — bongo fury
Not at all then. — bongo fury
Only compounding the crime of failing to acknowledge their input. — bongo fury
Or even in their present condition of (rather drastic) fallibility, let them join in. But properly acknowledged, and properly scrutinized. Is my point. — bongo fury
Could be either, of course. — bongo fury
So there are clear cases? Or not? — bongo fury
Electronic schematics, so something like: — wonderer1
And what is it that you would like an AI to do with such schematics? — Christoffer
Eh?
Never mind. — bongo fury
check that the AI understands the way the input design functions — wonderer1
then ask the AI to suggest a variation which matches some criteria that the input design cannot achieve. E.g. higher accuracy, higher power, more compact. (With the specific components needed for the alternate design specified in detail.) — wonderer1
Is there a loophole in this rule regarding using Gemini? Gemini is Google's AI algorithm that condenses a search result to a paragraph or two. — Shawn
Even if you conceive of it as an instance of the former, it is common sense that you should disclose it as such, so there isn't really a loophole here — Pierre-Normand
Thank you for your short story about Henry and his toy train. I will never forget it. C+. — Baden
Even if it's a quick side-track of the thread, let's, for the fun of it, check how far the current system handles it. — Christoffer
then ask the AI to suggest a variation which matches some criteria that the input design cannot achieve. E.g. higher accuracy, higher power, more compact. (With the specific components needed for the alternate design specified in detail.)
— wonderer1
Tried to ask for higher accuracy. — Christoffer
Thank you for your blog about Cyprus. I never knew there was so much dust there. Construction work can certainly be noisy and inconvenient during a holiday. B+ — Baden
The main thing to note is that we've added valuable and relevant human content to this thread, thus shaming ChatGPT into silence. — Baden
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.