livedarklions

I'm engaged in a discussion where a user has taken to posting AI generated posts to "prove" his point. My response to this has been to post nonsense arguments produced with the same AI tool and/or generating posts that come to the opposite conclusion using the same AI. https://www.bikeforums.net/general-c...ld-die-30.html

What's becoming obvious is that the capacity to generate pages of this junk is a ridiculously easy task as is spotting the clumsy rhetoric and vapid reasoning of the AI. I suggest a new rule that bans posting AI generated textual content. I think it will largely be self-enforcing as other users will no doubt flag such content fpr the mods. It's easily detectable and it can be confirmed to be bot written using this tool-- https://www.zerogpt.com/

If such a rule isn't made, this could easily become the new spam, bots arguing with bots.

Trakhak

I reported the first (known) AI post from that poster to the mods after you called him out on it.

base2 

Agree.
AI although it is not quite junk or plagiarism, is not original work by the human poster taking credit. It is, at best, a misrepresentation of the human behind the avatar.

Misrepresentation is a violation of the social contract that makes societies (in this case a BBS/Forum) valid, successful, functional, relevant.

AI generated posts are a shortcut to dishonest misrepresentation rather than a genuine human interaction. Whatever the exchange may be, the foundational idea that at least human to human should not be eroded away.

SpedFast

It just makes me hit the 'unsubscribe' button and if too many 'humans' do the same the forum will begin rotting from the inside out. It's in the best interest of the forum to block AI posts. My opinion.

blacknbluebikes 

There's a fair chance that posters using AI-generated answers will just fade out under their own boredom. Really, how much fun is it? Basically a "trolling derivative," most trolls don't persist too long. If I'm using a chatbot to post to BF, then before too long, I'm just doing copy paste copy paste copy paste. Fun if I can get someone into a conversation-battle, but by the third one... meh. So the idea of building rules and some enforcement process (and who's going to babysit that process?) seems noble yet ill-fated. Is someone suggesting that the user base finance a chatbot firewall for BF? Everyone reach into your wallet and... ah, yeah.

zandoval 

I also agree with livedarklions. But I am just thinking, just how much Intelligence is needed in order to post in this forum? I am pretty sure this problem will take care of itself. It's kinda like when I post something about Mountain Biking or Long Distance Touring. I do not do it but have learned much from others when in reality I do not do either. So what intelligence I have in these subjects could be considered Artificial. In many ways we are all guilty of Artificial Intelligence.

So I may be AI. But I am sentient. What that means is I do know a feeling of air on may face, bugs in my teeth, sweat on my brow, and a big smile as I ride my bicycle.

sentient: sĕn′shənt, -shē-ənt, -tē-ənt, Having sense perception; conscious. Experiencing sensation or feeling. Having a faculty, or faculties, of sensation and perception.

Sometimes, you may need to take a step back and wonder if those around you are sentient or simply AI...

jon c. 

Taking credit for work that is not yours is plagiarism.

Doesn't matter if the original author is a human or a bot.

And for that reason I would agree they should be banned. Although it would probably be more trouble than it's worth to try and enforce such a ban.

Darth Lefty 

I would not be shocked or dismayed to see it added to the instaban list. But the moderators only know about what you report. The forum software surely isn't up to catching it.

livedarklions

No on the firewall, maybe actually read what I wrote in the OP. Nobody expects the resources exist for such a thing.

In the thread I linked in the OP, I learned from another poster just how easy it is to detect AI text--first, it reads like crap so other users can spot it immediately. Then, all one has to do is copy the text and paste it into the dialog box on this page: https://www.zerogpt.com/ It will tell you what percentage of the post is human written. As I said in my OP, I think the enforcement mechanism is quite simple--other users will spot the text, check it out with zerogpt or whatever, and flag it for the mods. Infractions per the normal process, user bans on a case by case basis. I don't see how this is any different from the other bans, such as topic bans, are enforced.

I've done some moderating in the past, Waiting for people to get bored abusing the forum never works, especially if they've automated part of the process.

base2 

Still wrapping my head around a bot writing something coherent. I meant plagiarism of another humans work. But, yeah. Lending credence that the bot wrote an original work, copy/pasta of a bot would still be plagiarism, wouldn't it?

Plagiarism of a bot...That's just sad.

3alarmer 

​​​​​​​
...the ignore function still works OK here. So I'm filing this one under "solutions looking for a problem."

RCMoeur 

Now if that isn't a great .sig line...

Jeff Neese

There's no difference between using any of these new tools, and looking up information the old-fashioned way. In the old days one would need to enter what you're looking for into Google, then sift through all of the responses to determine which ones are relevant and which ones weren't, and so on. And then you have to take that and type it into a forum by hand? That's a lot of work, especially just to find information for someone that could have found it themselves.

If you ask an AI for information on a topic and ask it to cite its sources, that's a huge shortcut to both assembling the information, and presenting it in an easy to digest format. Very similar to Wikipedia. How long before we say "remember when we had to Google everything and sift through all the results?"

Also it's not plagiarism unless you claim the work as your own. If you copy something from a physics textbook that is also found in every other physics textbook and is existing information in the world today, it would be obvious to (almost) anyone that it's the work of Isaac Newton, and that the poster is not trying to take credit for it. There's nothing wrong using an AI bot to find information for you, and now they even provide text that explains it.

If you're debating a topic, it's pretty silly to say "Hey, no fair! You just Googled it. That's cheating - you didn't read all those books yourself!"

It's a silly argument. Just focus on the substance and don't sweat where it came from or how the person assembled it.

Go ahead and try it. Ask your favorite AI bot "Explain why too much sugar is bad for your health, and provide at least 8 different sources for that information." So much easier than with Google, and its getting better all the time. Of course if you're selling sugar-filled treats to the ignorant masses, you're going to cry foul when someone presents clear and overwhelming evidence so quickly and easily.

tyrion

I think we should hear the AI's take on disc brakes before we call for the ban hammer.

livedarklions

So BF should have just been copy paste from Wikipedia for the past 15 years?!

There's a world of difference between using sources as a reference in composing a post and having AI actually compose the post itself. You just got through killing a thread by posting bot posts again and again. You did not post "clear and overwhelming evidence," you just swamped the thread with sheer tons of easily refuted bs. You just made it a full time job to refute it by automating the bsing, so everyone else had to give up. It's filibustering by sheer volume. What you posted was entirely brain dead, and I demonstrated again and again that all you were doing was manipulating the AI to spit out meaningless results to suit your agenda. I did that by getting the AI to spit out essays that stated the exact opposite of yours. The whole exercise was pointless, no real information was exchanged, just two of us demonstrating that we can make a computer spit out whatever we want it to say.

This is very simple, I don't go to an internet forum to read google results, I go to google for that. I don't go to BF to read wikipedia articles. I go to Wikipedia for that. Likewise, I don't go to the forum to read bot results, I go to the bot. This is supposed to be a site for humans to interact with each other, not for endless reams of computers "arguing" with each other. The sheer amount of crap that can be produced with AI will not be manageable if its posting is allowed unchecked.

Atlas Shrugged

Like the last thread that just got shut down. This is why we can’t have nice things!

livedarklions

OK, I'm posting this because it's a good example of the kind of bs I'm talking about which took me literally 10 seconds to create, copy and paste:
AI generated--
Both bicycle disc brakes and rim brakes have their own advantages and disadvantages, and which one is superior largely depends on the specific use case and personal preferences.

Disc brakes are typically considered to have more stopping power than rim brakes, particularly in wet or muddy conditions, as they operate independently of the rim and are not affected by the rim's surface condition. This can make disc brakes a good choice for off-road or mountain biking, where braking power and consistency are critical.

Disc brakes also tend to be more consistent and require less adjustment over time, since they operate using a hydraulic or cable system that does not rely on the rim's surface for braking.

However, disc brakes can be more expensive and heavier than rim brakes, and may require specific hubs and wheels to accommodate the disc rotor. They can also be more complex to install and maintain, as they involve hydraulic fluid or cables and more moving parts.

On the other hand, rim brakes tend to be lighter, more affordable, and easier to install and maintain. They may be a good choice for road biking or touring, where weight and simplicity are important factors.

In summary, both disc brakes and rim brakes have their own advantages and disadvantages, and the choice largely depends on the specific use case and personal preferences.

livedarklions

Takes about 5 seconds longer to get it to take a position and cite sources:
AI post #1--
Bicycles have come a long way since their inception in the early 19th century. One of the most significant advances in recent years is the development of disc brakes, which have become increasingly popular in the cycling industry. Disc brakes are superior to traditional rim brakes in several ways, including greater stopping power, better performance in wet conditions, and lower maintenance requirements.

Disc brakes work by using calipers to squeeze a rotor attached to the wheel hub, creating friction and slowing the wheel down. On the other hand, rim brakes apply pressure to the rim of the wheel itself, which creates friction and slows down the bike. Although both types of brakes can provide effective stopping power, disc brakes have a clear advantage in several important ways.

First and foremost, disc brakes offer significantly greater stopping power than rim brakes. According to a study conducted by Shimano, a leading manufacturer of cycling components, disc brakes can reduce stopping distance by up to 25% compared to rim brakes in dry conditions (1). In wet conditions, disc brakes are even more effective, reducing stopping distance by up to 70% compared to rim brakes (2). This increased stopping power can be particularly valuable in emergency situations, such as when a cyclist needs to avoid a collision with a pedestrian or vehicle.

Another advantage of disc brakes is their performance in wet conditions. Because disc brakes are located near the hub of the wheel rather than at the rim, they are less affected by water and debris on the road. This means that they can maintain their stopping power even when the rim is wet or dirty, which can be particularly important in rainy or muddy conditions. In contrast, rim brakes can become significantly less effective when wet, which can be dangerous for cyclists.

In addition to their superior performance, disc brakes also have lower maintenance requirements than rim brakes. Rim brakes are prone to wear and tear, particularly if the rims are made of aluminum rather than more durable materials like carbon fiber. Over time, the rim can become worn down and uneven, which can compromise the effectiveness of the brake. In contrast, disc brakes are generally more durable and require less frequent maintenance. They are also easier to adjust and replace when necessary.

Despite these clear advantages, some cyclists may still prefer rim brakes for their simplicity and light weight. However, as technology continues to advance and disc brakes become even more widely available and affordable, it is likely that they will become the default choice for most cyclists.

In conclusion, disc brakes are clearly superior to rim brakes in several key ways. They offer greater stopping power, better performance in wet conditions, and lower maintenance requirements. While some cyclists may prefer rim brakes for their simplicity or light weight, it is clear that disc brakes are the superior choice for most riders.

Sources:

1. Shimano. "Disc Brakes vs Rim Brakes." Shimano, https://bike.shimano.com/en-EU/techn...im-brakes.html.
2. "Disc Brakes Vs. Rim Brakes." Bicycling.com, 20 Aug. 2019, https://www.bicycling.com/skills-tip...vs-rim-brakes/.

_---_----------

But wait! AI has changed its "mind":
AI post #2--

​​​​Bicycles have undergone numerous technological advancements over the years, and one of the most important components that have received significant development is the braking system. When it comes to bicycle braking systems, two types are prevalent - rim brakes and disc brakes. While disc brakes have gained significant popularity in recent years, it is crucial to note that rim brakes still offer several advantages over disc brakes.

Firstly, rim brakes are simpler and more lightweight compared to disc brakes. Rim brakes work by applying friction directly to the rim of the wheel, which slows down the bike. This design eliminates the need for additional components such as calipers, rotors, and brake pads that are necessary for disc brakes. The lack of these extra components means that rim brakes weigh less and require less maintenance, making them more appealing to casual riders who don't want to spend a lot of time or money maintaining their bikes.

Secondly, rim brakes are more affordable compared to disc brakes. Disc brake systems are generally more expensive compared to rim brakes, and while the price gap between the two types of brakes is narrowing, rim brakes are still a more affordable option for budget-conscious cyclists. According to an article in Bicycling Magazine, disc brakes can cost up to twice as much as rim brakes (1). For beginner riders or those looking for a cost-effective option, rim brakes are a clear winner.

Thirdly, rim brakes provide a better road feel compared to disc brakes. Rim brakes offer a more natural and intuitive feel, as the rider can modulate the amount of pressure on the brake lever to adjust their speed. This means that the rider has better control over the bike, making it easier to navigate through corners or other challenging terrain. Disc brakes, on the other hand, require more force to activate, which can make it harder to fine-tune the bike's speed.

It is also worth noting that rim brakes are still widely used in professional cycling, indicating that they remain a viable option for competitive riders. According to Cycling News, rim brakes are still the brake of choice for most pro teams (2). While some teams have made the switch to disc brakes, others continue to use rim brakes, indicating that they still offer significant advantages.

In conclusion, while disc brakes have been gaining in popularity in recent years, rim brakes still offer several advantages over their disc counterparts. Rim brakes are simpler, more affordable, offer better road feel, and are still widely used in professional cycling. While disc brakes may be the superior choice for some riders, it is essential to note that rim brakes remain a viable and practical option for many.

Sources:

1. "Disc Brakes Vs. Rim Brakes." Bicycling.com, 20 Aug. 2019, https://www.bicycling.com/skills-tip...vs-rim-brakes/.
2. "Disc Brakes vs. Rim Brakes in the Pro Peloton: Who's Using What and Why?" Cycling News, 4 July 2019, https://www.cyclingnews.com/features...-what-and-why/.

Jeff Neese

That's not bad. Follow it up by asking for 10 additional sources, and then give it to someone that doesn't understand that both types of brakes have their advantages and disadvantages. A lot easier than Googling. Note that AI is not going to, nor did it, take a position on which is "better". It just explained the differences. And don't forget that you can always ask it for more references and sources, if two isn't enough.

In the case that got your panties all in a bunch, there was absolutely nothing subjective about the topic - it was physics and the overwhelming body of existing knowledge in the world today. You doubted some very basic and well-known physics (going back to the 1700s with Isaac Newton) as well as principles of bicycle operation borne out by experienced cyclists everywhere, as well as many, many experts writing on the topic. But despite overwhelming evidence (gathered and assembled by AI) you continued to argue your point. You didn't like how easy it was to show that you were wrong, so now you're whining about the methods used.

If you're arguing with a flat-earther, it's easier to ask an AI for all of the reasons we know the earth is not flat, and to provide references for its sources. I don't need to be an astrophysicist to refute it, I just have to know the the earth is NOT flat and that there is overwhelming evidence. If the flat-earther complains about how you gather the information instead of what the information says, they're not being intellectually honest. And they were probably home-schooled. That is not a topic that leaves much room for original ideas. AI would be the perfect tool to gather evidence and explain it.

In the case of this particular thread, you may just as well have asked "Ban the use of Google when posting in BF?". Or how about "Ban the use of calculators when discussing things that involve math?" Maybe "Ban the use of Wikipedia and require original research only?"

Jeff Neese

This is not academia and we are not being graded on originality. If there's information out there that supports your point, feel free to copy/paste it from any source you desire. Tell us what you know personally, but if you need to use Google or AI or other tools to provide additional information, go ahead.

AI is nothing more than a natural-language interface to the existing body of knowledge in the world. Although we've all seen that AI can generate "original" content, like if you ask it to write a limerick or song lyrics, that's not what we're talking about. In this case it's more like Google on steroids, using natural language as input and output. It doesn't make up facts or fabricate sources.

If this were academia, everyone already knows that the output of AI does not pass simple plagiarism detection, and the AI itself will tell you so. That's never been the intent of its use.

If someone says they think that aluminum is just as strong as steel, an AI might be the best tool to concisely pull together a refutation of that false idea. You could Google it and throw a bunch of links at the person, or just ask the AI. When you include a request to cite it's sources (mostly information from the world of physics and materials sciences) you've saved yourself a ton of time. Copy and paste as desired.

base2 

Stop. Just stop.

This is a lot like when the 28mph e-bike guy in a t-shirt that says: Yes, it's an e-bike. Yes, I just passed you. Get over it." passes a guy laboriously climbing a steep hill. The e-bike guy believes he's found a short cut to bike riding while the laborious hill-climber knows there is no shortcut to fitness.

Nobody cares what you, Jeff use AI bots for in your personal life. You are not putting in the work for a genuine human interaction. Heck, you can't even be bothered to sift the information to maybe even learn a new thing.

You found a shortcut to posting on the internet. So, stop. Just stop.



(Human generated text concerning the content your character reserved.)

Jeff Neese

Thank you for granting me permission to use the most efficient way to gather information, in my personal life. That's what all interaction with internet forums is - my personal life. Yours too, presumably.

Also, it is not anyone's responsibility to "put in the work" just so you can feel "genuine human interaction". If the information is already out there and the work has already been done, I'm going to use it, even if it seems too impersonal to you.

If you claimed that aluminum were a stronger metal than steel, how much work would you expect me to put in, just to show you that it's not? I don't need to do any research of my own, at all, and genuine human interaction is not the goal. Whether it's a few articles I find by Googling, or an AI bot that assembled and explained the same information, literally does not matter to the facts being discussed.

Now that we have Google and other search engines, we have lost the genuine human interaction required when we had to go to the library to look things up. Is that a bad thing? Maybe, but it also means we can gather more information, quicker and more easily, than we ever could before. AI is the simply the next step (some would say the final step) in that evolution.

tyrion

Oh man I'm old enough to remember going to the library, reading the newspapers on those wooden stick things, trying to do research on microfiche readers.

The "library" aspect of the internet is great. The AI aspect has me a little worried.

As I've said on other threads, AI is the next arms race. It's a completely different animal than the good old WWW world library.

AI makes me feel old.

base2 

You just don't get it. There are human persons here. Each one with a consciousness, a voice, a personality, a history & a place.

You are not one of them. To me, you are a piece of plastic. Premade & formed for convenience & disposability. Regurgitating text you didn't even write for a cheap self-serving dopamine hit. There is no value here.

Having AI generate posts for you to post here says a lot about who you are as a person. Having AI generate posts undermines the value of these BBS in the first place.

It is & should be frowned upon.

You are the hubris filled e-biker in the above example not doing any work & expecting equal respect.

No. You've violated the social contract. It's time to go.

Chuck M 

I missed the AI brouhaha. Probably because the thread reached the TLDR point by the time that gun was pulled. But if someone needs AI or even a copy and paste of someone else's opinions to argue on the Internet they probably just need to calm down until good riding weather returns in the spring.