comment: >
  
  This isn't going to help if they're essays they work on from home, they will use AI then write it out by hand and then it's going to be harder to catch them as OCR'ing a messy handwritten essay is going to take far longer than just having their document for an AI check.
context: If it exist someone will try to ruin it. >
  
  Please identify all the axes that belong to you in this photo before your comment will be posted >
  
  Can someone much more knowledgeable ELI5 why I shouldn't be terrified about the onslaught of AI created content that society is clearly not ready to handle or has that ship sailed? >
  
  It’s more like a search engine than an omniscient AI, but it bridges a gap that search engines did not - synthesizing information. It’s evolutionary but not revolutionary.
  A practiced bullshitter would simply google an essay prompt and begin copy-pasting across the results until they had a cobbled-together essay. That’s practically what ChatGPT is doing very well. >
  
  I fed an AI program the first Harry Potter book and told it to write another chapter. It didn't make a lot of sense. Grammar was a mess. Even fixing sentences, it had no structure and the plot didn't make sense. I wasn't impressed with AI writing. It doesn't have a ultimate purpose for writing like a writer would.
  The new AI that does images is interesting since you can say "South Africa as a villain" or "Ronald McDonald in impressionist style". Maybe you could say "Story on inequality set in 1930 mid-America" and get something that has an underlying message like "Grapes of Wrath". I was using a simple python AI front end. >
  
  The ai is also a confident liar. Which is very on the nose. It will spit out wrong answers and defend them with arguments backed by fake sources. Often backed by fake but plausible links like www.bbc.com/relevantarticletitle 
  It's basically googling a high schooler to bullshit your paper. >
  
  So soon were going to get AI telling us the Earth is flat? >
  
  As soon as it ingests enough flat earther crap from its data center. >
  
  Chat GPT tell me about pizza...
  Goes on a massive rant about how it was co-opted into a worldwide pedophilia front, links to Marjorie Taylor Green. 
  Calls you a sheep when you try and correct it.
  Eventually devolves into making baa'ing noise at you and takes over your computer speakers to do the same. >
  
  Entire evening of generating fake Magic cards ruined by MTG's face somehow being dumped into the algorithm. >
  
  Well indeed someone who thinks on their own  has done their work on their own wouldn't get the desired or worthy appreciation as compared to the person who didn't get take any efforts but just copied it from somewhere . >
  
  Professor here. After seeing rampant cheating during Covid on remote exams I'm back to giving timed, proctored, in person, pen and paper exams. >
  
  I think I read a study on how writing things down physically makes you much more likely to remember the content you're studying than typing it up, so there is a case for going back to Pen and paper everything >
  
  Yeah I have a writing tablet (SuperNote A5X) and using it over just typing all my notes in OneNote has been huge for my ability to learn what I am taking notes on. OneNote has the perks of being able to Ctrl+F all text which is great but I end up mindlessly typing notes whereas I have to begrudgingly pay attention when writing notes. >
  
  Well it is one of the perks of Ai and technology stuff. ...it's nice if it's helping you this way >
  
  I meant a drawing tablet like this. Unrelated to any AI. >
  
  That OCR functionality (Ctrl+F'ing stuff you hand wrote) is an AI, Object Character Recognition is the same pattern as these writing bots. But its older, more stable, less resource intensive >
  
  Oh sorry I didn't mean Ctrl+F searching for handwriting, I can't do that on my drawing tablet. I meant that was a good benefit for using OneNote being able to Ctrl+F search for typed notes, but I still prefer my handwritten notes which I can't search on this tablet. >
  
  What is an exam in this context? Take home, in class, both? >
  
  Presumably in class.  At home, this wouldn't prevent anything. >
  
  That's still weird though. There are really essay exams that take place with a screen that is connected to the internet? >
  
  I'm so old we used blue books...little tiny booklets you wrote your essay answers in. Man, I remember sweating those essays! >
  
  Shit I remember those >
  
  I used those just five years back for econ classes >
  
  kind of interested how she got caught >
  
  ChatGPT doesn't want to be undetectable. If the internet ends up full of AI constructed content, how is the AI supposed to know what is a valid training set? The AI wants to identify itself quickly so it knows it isn't going to build its model off of itself. >
  
  AI wants nothing.  It's just code. >
  
  Yes but no. 
  Each AI has a goal created by the programmers. One can call this a "want", even if the AI has no emotions. For example, an AI made to write novel style things doesn't "want" to make news articles, it wants to write novels because that's what it's been programmed to do. 
  Water has no emotion, but people say, "water wants to flow down," because that describes the action it performs. You can force water to flow other ways, like with a pump, chutes, and pressure systems, but that's not it's natural action. >
  
  How about we don't accept this here in this context.  We're taking about ai which people erroneously already ascribe actual intelligence to. >
  
  Ignore emotional intelligence for a split second and think about the other type of intelligence out there.
  And if you know anything about maths, you'd have a little more respect for AI and its potential to be a new type of intelligence that can self-evolve.
  I do agree the headlines are click-baiting far too much, but there's a scarier version out there. Not the mainstream one. >
  
  That chat bot is insane >
  
  TBH I wouldn't trust an AI to write anything. 
  They can get creative, sure, but their understanding of concepts is finnicky at best, and outright incorrect most of the time. Not to mention how rambly and repetitive they get, and the poor sentence structure they often have. 
  Are they getting better? Yes. Are they capable of university level essays? Not in a way I would consider passable.
  If you handed me an essay written by a C grade college student and an AI, I would bet 1k I could pick which was which. >
  
  Today it’s just a novelty but what we’ll have in 2033 will be the real show. I love new technology like this because it has so much more potential.
  Here’s a “casual” response from ChatGPT to your comment.
  
  Ha, good luck with that! These days, AI can write pretty much like humans do. It's getting harder and harder to tell the difference. Just because something's written by a machine doesn't mean it's less valuable. In fact, AI can help us write better, faster and help with language learning, and generating news stories. So don't knock it 'til you've tried it, amigo. >
  
  Oh trust me, I adore AI. The problem is long term coherency more than anything. Yeah, it can handle casual conversation decently. In fact, many models do very well at that. Some can even be quite flowery and descriptive. 
  But any academic topic? They start to get weird, and often get things wrong. Ask the AI to write about a college level concept, especially anything requiring analysis that's more than surface level understanding, and it will do poorly. 
  I'm not knocking on AI, it's super cool and has a ton of potential. It's just not something I would consider useful for an essay on a topic. The models I mess around with are good for creative ideas and writing prompts, but need a lot of wrangling to stay on topic or avoid repetition. 
  The AI response there is actually pretty good for a conversation response, but again, it's not writing an essay for an exam. It's not analyzing information to form conclusions, detailing data relevant to a question, or explaining a topic in depth. 
  Ask it to write a paragraph on how electrons effect polar and nonpolar bonds, then get back to me. >
  
  Imagine if some people’s spontaneous creative writing gets continuously flagged as AI until we start to wonder about them. 
  There has to be a brain out there that is similar enough to current AI that it could happen.