Chat GPT in STEEM - Is it possible to detect it?
In my last article I wrote about the IA chatbox and the consequences that it can bring to STEEM. Especially because I had readed a new that said how many users were using chatgpt for write books and sell it in Amazon Kindle.
I was concerned that we would not be able to differentiate between a text written by a human and one written by an artificial intelligence. And I put my ideas into practice. I think that if we accept the use of AI as a tool and users declare which of their texts were generated by these we could create a healthy environment in conjunction with new technologies (although AI-generated text should not be treated as the author's original and therefore should not represent the majority of the article).
The real problem occurs when a user publishes an article whose content has been generated entirely or mostly by Artificial Intelligence, but the user does not declare it but presents the product as coming from his intellectual capacity trying to deceive the reader, desecrating the essence of STEEM and being rewarded without having made the slightest effort.
While these thoughts were still fresh in my head I happened to get a mention from a user promoting his new book which he is selling on Amazon Kindle.... If I just read that the new trend is to use AI to write books and sell them on Kindle, how could I not be suspicious of this user's sincerity? even if he might be totally innocent, at least I should investigate!
That's what I've done, I'll tell you how and the tools I found to do it, how to use them correctly and the probability that an innocent person is guilty!
Pixabay Testing the available tools |
|---|
At first I thought it was wonderful that the user was using his blog to promote his products (this is one of the uses for STEEM that we have exploited very little) and I think it would have been more perfect if he had offered his products with availability to be paid in STEEM. But before leaving a comment I had to do my research not only for this particular author but to find a way to protect us from all those who want to try to cheat us now and in the future.
And with the help of Google I found an article that presented 3 tools created to detect AI-generated texts with certain probability. These are Writer, GPTZero and ChatGPT Detector .
There were the tools, now I just had to test their effectiveness and the best way to do it was with content whose origin was clear to me, my own content... So I used my previous article in which at the end I used an AI-generated paragraph (declared as such) to compare the results of the tools when I used paragraphs generated by me and when I used this AI-generated paragraph, that way I could see the reliability of the results.
All 3 tools detected the paragraphs written by me as "human generated content". So far so good and it was time to test with the AI-generated content you.com to which both Writer and GPTZero detected the text as human-generated.
But the third tool did detect that the text was generated by an AI so this tool passed the test with 100% effectiveness.
Interrogating the suspect |
|---|
It seems that I have one functional tool and two that may or may not work, at least sometime they could detect something so I didn't rule them out at all. If that user was using AI to write his books the probability that he would do the same to write his steemit article was very high. For the verification to occur without errors you must examine one paragraph at a time and that's what I did.
More than 50% of the paragraphs in the article were AI-generated.... 😥
Don't be quick to point fingers at someone you suspect. |
|---|
For a moment I thought that maybe there was a probability that the user has used an AI translator to write his article in a language he does not master and I have learned from the DU community that if the writer is using a translator the final article is written with the translator's words and although the message may keep its essence the expression is not the one it would have if the author wrote in his native language.
So maybe an AI translator chose the words under some algorithm and that is why the tools detected that the paragraphs came from an AI.
To check it I decided to write this article using a translator Deepl, that way I could check the translated paragraphs with the tools I had just found.
Indeed the first two detected some paragraphs as AI-generated but they were the same ones that made the mistake of detecting the AI-generated paragraph as human-generated so that makes me discard them as definitive verification.
However the ChatGPT Detector tool showed that every single paragraph I write here using the translator has been generated by a human, which it did not do with the paragraphs of our friend the amazon seller.
This situation is uncomfortable for me but it has mentioned people that I usually read and identify as "good people" and even with all the above I do not assume that the user is not genuine, however I invite these friends not to trust so soon, also I leave the tool ChatGPT Detector so that it can be used by content verifiers, in this way they could check the possible introduction of non-genuine text in the articles.
Kindle is filling up with AI written books, there are even youtube tutorials on how to do it. Let's take care of our STEEM Blockchain, if we will welcome AI's as a tool let's do this in a conscious way always respecting those who work hard to generate their content 100% genuine, not in a malicious or misleading way.
I think this article could be of particular interest to: @patjewell @damithudaya @weisser-rabe @dove11 @waqarahmadshah
Thank you for reading my article, I hope you enjoyed it. Stay tuned for comments!
Yeah!! You are exactly correct on this point. Not AI, think about Canva, it has totally saved my life. AI should take as a good tool for our works. But using it and generating post and sharing is same as plagiarism.
To be hones, I usually check the posts from ChatGPT Detector as a curator, apart from the plagiarism. Even some of the entries of my last contest were resulted as fake. I can do is prevent from curating the posts that are suspicious, but still I am not comfortable in accusing or leaving a messaege about that. Because you see, if it's plagairized we can provide the proof/ source and show it. But in this case, we have to give the full credibitlity for these checker. No way to prove as I know.
You see this is a tricky business. May be some recommendation from the team will be ideal. I think you get my point!!
Gracias por su comentario, es muy valioso para mi. Desde que he estado leyendo noticias sobre Chat GPT y las cosas que los usuarios hacen con él he visto como algo inevitable el momento en el que llegue a STEEM (cuando digo Chat GPT me refiero a todas las herramientas de la misma naturaleza). El problema no es el uso sino el mal uso de estas herramientas.
Por ejemplo los usuarios que diseñan en Canvas lo citan en las imágenes (eso es un buen uso), creo que si de la misma forma uso contenido generado por IA y refiero de donde proviene tampoco debería haber muchos inconvenientes con esto.
Pero la naturaleza de estas herramientas lamentablemente presenta un potencial que va en contra de la naturaleza de STEEM (Recompensa de la capacidad intelectual) y es inevitable que tarde o temprano nuestra blockchain se inunde de contenido proveniente de una IA con usuarios atribuyéndose el crédito y siendo recompensados por ello, esta ya seria una linea roja.
Pero este es un tema totalmente nuevo y las herramientas desarrolladas para verificación carecen de confiabilidad, sólo arrojan resultados con probabilidad y eso hace que sea imposible afirmar al 100% que el usuario no ha generado su contenido de forma genuina, sin embargo crea la incertidumbre.
Ahora bien, nunca he estado a favor de señalar a alguien directamente pues yo mismo cometi muchos errores en el pasado y me hubiera gustado tener a alguien ahí para decirme que eso estaba mal o que me guiase por el camino correcto, por eso evite mencionar en el artículo al usuario cuyo contenido fue comprobado y solo he mencionado a los que pudiesen haber sido afectados por el ya que (el los mencionó para dicho artículo), pero aun si este usuario no nos hubiese mencionado ya esto era algo que me venía preocupando como se refleja en mi artículo anterior que fue escrito mucho antes.
Creo que el punto importante aquí es que podamos establecer lo antes posible las formas sanas en que se puede usar estas herramientas dentro de STEEM BLOCKCHAIN, las formas que se considerarán abuso, incluso y de ser posible guias sobre el uso correcto y advertencias sobre el uso incorrecto, de esta forma cuando encontramos abusos los orientamos a esas guías para intentar corregir esta práctica y mantener la esencia de STEEM.
Esto vino para quedarse y creo que es necesario que se establezcan pautas que puedan regularizar el uso. Es lo que busco generar en realidad pues creo que incluso sería decepcionante para un verificador que el mayor porcentaje de los artículos verificados sean no humanos y que no exista una forma de orientar y corregir esta práctica.
TEAM 1
Congratulations! Your Comment has been upvoted through steemcurator04. We support good comments anywhere..@kouba01, I think some comments on this post needs to be curated 😄
Thank you very much, this is very useful.
I think this tool has been used by many steemians to post content, I just found some AI-detected posts.
This is a great content . All have to take a look at this. Thanks for sharing
Gracias a ti por leer y apoyar amigo!!
👍👍
Thank you, friend!
I'm @steem.history, who is steem witness.
Thank you for witnessvoting for me.
please click it!
(Go to https://steemit.com/~witnesses and type fbslo at the bottom of the page)
The weight is reduced because of the lack of Voting Power. If you vote for me as a witness, you can get my little vote.
Thanks for the mention but I see no utility of this tool in my case. All right I translate some of my posts in Spanish and I know that in some cases the translator changes the meaning of what I want to say. I have tried reverse translating at times and I laugh what I read but that's how the things stand.
I guess there is no gender specific words like he and she in Spanish so the result always amuses me.
By the way, if you have translated this post, I thought there was no word like readed in English language.
Incidentally I came across this ChatGPT last week for the first time when I saw a couple of members getting banned by the moderator for using this tool and I was like, "Cant they write 30-40 words with out a tool?
I tried the tool by writing a few sentences and it announced that your text is 99% AI genereted. I laughed aloud and gave up the idea of trying it further.
Note- May I know why you thought my opinion would be important in this matter that I am neither interested nor willing to use in future because I know it will kill my creativity.
Ese párrafo en particular no lo traduje, quería escribir con mi pésimo conocimiento del inglés sin traductor, la idea de usar traductor para descartar las herramientas vino unos segundos después de haber escrito el primer párrafo.
La mención hacia usted y todos los que he mencionado no es una forma de señalarles por usar IA. Pienso que el tema podría ser de su interés porque en la mención que dije fue hecha hacia mi para apoyar a un usuario que promocionaba su libro en amazon todos los mencionados en mi articulo fueron mencionados junto a mi en aquella promoción.
Así que también les menciono aquí con el propósito de compartir las herramientas de verificación para que puedan ustedes mismos verificar y decidir la veracidad de aquel escritor antes de apoyarlo.
Solo como una forma de prevención, sin embargo cada quien es libre de decidir y actuar, pero esa es la razón de la mención. Espero no haberle incomodado con ella.!
I got your point dear bro, and I agree that I did not know about this tool and this book was written using this tool, if that's the case it is a serious matter. I just checked as I have also posted my comment on that one. Thanks for heads up 👍
No you haven't bothered me otherwise I would not give you point of view on this topic. Thank you once again.
Thanks for mentioning - I will write about tomorrow myself.
Gut! Ich freue mich schon darauf, es zu lesen! Prost!
Oh wow! I only have two words.. How sad!!
It saddens me to think that people, Steemians, can do things like this. What happened to being proud of your work?
It puts a damper on the spirit for me.
Thank you for opening that "can of worms".
Creo que es lo que está de moda y la probabilidad de que pronto seamos totalmente invadidos por esta práctica es alta. Por eso no me enfoco tanto en aquel sujeto sino en la urgencia que tenemos para establecer los criterios bajo los cuales se aceptaran estas herramientas y bajo los cuales no, las guías de orientación y la inclusión en la verificación de artículos.
La naturaleza de STEEM lo hace muy vulnerable al fraude proveniente de este tipo de herramientas pero a la vez no podemos ser extremistas en prohibir su uso, sin embargo es necesario establecer un punto de equilibrio y los requisitos que deben cumplir los artículos incluyendo ahora este parámetro (uso de IA como generador de texto).
Aunque aun no veo esta discusión abierta en ninguna parte pero si sucede y usted la encuentra primero que yo agradecería me lo haga conocer.!
May true writing conquer! Victorious!
I will for sure let you know should I find anything.
great review and interesting to read.
Me alegra mucho que le haya gustado, gracias por dejarme su comentario!