Posts written by Chat GPT and other AI

[CruCru]

I keep seeing posts written by Chat GPT on various threads. Sometimes the poster says something along the lines of “I got AI to summarise what I wanted to say and here it is” and sometimes they post with no reference to AI (but it is fairly obvious).

Please can this stop? This site will become unusable if the posts get written by robots. MN is populated by articulate, well educated women; we don’t need to use AI to communicate with each other. It isn’t allowed in school.

I suggest that obvious AI posts should be reported for deletion.

A post of mine was once scrutinised by another poster who was convinced I had used AI. It was disappointing on several levels -it detracted from what I wanted to say and prevented the engagement I had hoped for as subsequent posters, quite naturally, hesitated to respond in good faith. It also left me feeling self conscious and a little crest-fallen: being accused of using AI is like being told, straight up, that one is a dreadful writer.

Its amazing how so many on mumsnet are so confident that what they see or understand in something posted and existing in virtual reality has to be true.

So many threads taken up with posters being judgemental, whereas in reality a forum exists to exchange information or ideas, or even ask questions.

Why bother to say anything if you dont like a post.

For some on here with such high standards they could then just whizz through threads because so many can be discarded for bad spelling and punctuation, and others for being presumed to be AI.

Of course the worst example is when someone starts a thread asking for help and some knowall jumps in and accuses the OP of lying, or not telling a true story.

Of course they may well operate like this in real life, but assume they cant have many friends left.

Is this specifically about the use of AI to write posts or is it about MN in general? It’s not a requirement that people read every post - on threads with a lot of repetition, there’s going to be some skimming. People will read the posts they’re interested in and skim / skip over the rest. That is human nature.

MN can be judgmental but it can also show real kindness. There are whole groups of posters who club together to knit blankets for posters who have been bereaved. I’ve had some very helpful advice from people in exercise and gardening.

What some of the AI fans seem to fail to understand is that they can produce as much AI slop as they want, but they can’t force anyone to read it. Is it interesting enough for people to spend their spare time reading it? That’s what it will come down to in the end and nothing, no rules about the use of AI, or explanations about how it’s used to make writing easier, or accusations of snobbery will make any difference.

Look at the way Facebook is going, there are multiple reasons for it but one of them is the amount of rubbish AI posts that swamp all the rest.

I loathe AI, but you sound like a snob. Not everyone has the same grammatical abilities and access to your level of education. You need to remember that.

put if some are to criticise peoples grammar and spelling how then can they contribute if they are criticised for useing ai ?

I don’t like to see people criticise others’ SPAG, it’s lazy in a debate. In the past I have reported those who do so.

I went to a very ordinary comprehensive on the south coast. There wasn’t anything particularly fancy about the education I received. Being able to correctly use the rules of grammar isn’t a special ability.

Honestly? People who don’t have English as a first language are usually pretty impressive - they can speak and write in more than one language. Even if their English is not perfect, they can usually get their point across very well. What can be humbling is when someone for whom English is a second (or even third) language writes with no mistakes whatsoever.

Similarly, people with dyslexia often have plenty to say. If they write interesting posts then it won’t matter if they have some SPAG errors.

Literacy IS a special ability, which we teach it in schools. There's also dyslexia to contend with.

Do you want to go onto a thread and read a bunch of posts generated by AI? Or will you see a load of Chat GPT stuff and move on without commenting?

or do you want to read a load of posters picking apart someone's grammer, or trolling each other, or any number of conversations that are not related or helpful in anyway etc,

overall yes i understand your point if threads were all fully on topic and no other distractions and fully knowledgably and educational posts then no Ai would be needed,

I don’t see anything that implies people with dyslexia etc. shouldn’t be posting on MN.
That poster said "If you want to use a shortcut on MN, why post?"
I don't see how you could interpret as that as anything other than disagreeing with people using any type of support function to help them post (not just dyslexia, how about people who use speech to type because they have visual impairments).

The rest of your post is pure 'whataboutery.'

It's like saying 'You're saying there's nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone? Okay, well, what about if that disagreement turns into a fight, are you okay with that? What about wars, if you think that disagreeing with someone can be healthy then are you saying that war is a good thing?'

Using AI for some stuff doesn't mean automatic escalation for using it for everything.

Posters who troll or pick apart people’s SPAG can be reported for deletion. Mainly because they don’t add to the discussion.

What I like about MN is that, by its nature, it requires people to be able to write well enough to put their point across.

Sorry but if the quote under is answer to the quote above, do you mean that ESOL can't write wellenough to put their point across?
Just asking as ESOL.

careful, you're edging very close to "people whose first language isn't English shouldn't be allowed to post on MN" or "people with dyslexia shouldn't be allowed to post...." etc.

No, that post was in response to the one about AI not being allowed in schools (the post I quoted). I have replied re people who speak English as a second (or third) language elsewhere on the thread.

I don’t see speech to text as a shortcut, it’s a tool in the same way as a hearing aid or glasses. It’s making a task possible, not making it quicker. A shortcut would be using AI summaries or AI to write posts like previous posters said.

My post isn’t whataboutery, it’s trying to find the limit between too much AI and just enough. If it’s fine to write posts with AI, why would it not be fine to read them with AI too? Plenty of people find reading difficult, why can’t they use it to help them?

Edited to add: what’s with all the accusations of snobbery/ableism to support the use of AI? The first reason I don’t like AI posts is because they’re shite. I’m also concerned about people outsourcing their thinking and the effects on the environment!

the op writes it in their words and straight away people shout Ai rather than engaging with the op ;

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/weight_loss_chat/5509431-food-industry-view-its-not-upfs-that-are-the-problem-its-snacking-on-the-upfs

Why make the time and effort to craft a well thought out op ? when people still assume Ai ?

I can understand why people think that OP is AI although I believe her / him when she / he says it isn’t. It’s the combination of bold, italic instructions, lists and the multiple instances of asking a question and then answering it in the next sentence. That OP says they work in the food industry - it may be that they write copy (or see a lot of copy written in that way).

I’m going to say that I agree with NoraLuka. Being told that I am a snob because I don’t want to read Chat GPT / AI posts is neither damning nor silencing. I am sure I have been accused of worse.

We never say to people did you read that from wikipedia, did you read that from a newspaper, or did you read that from a book so why now is the fashion of is that ai ?

Because it reduces our cognitive input which is damaging for us as individuals

But on a personal level, as a former investment writer and journalist, it’s absolutely destroyed many careers becase Just Use ChatGPT -
nobody is hiring.

I even know psychologists who use it for their reports which I would have assumed wouldn’t be allowed - but it is.

fair point but then thats how tech evolved eg wikipedia before chatgpt ?

I do. Sources matter.