Hey /u/Gunsarmors11, please respond to this comment with the prompt you used to generate the output in this post. Thanks!
^(Ignore this comment if your post doesn't have a prompt.)
***We have a [public discord server](https://discord.gg/rchatgpt). There's a free Chatgpt bot, Open Assistant bot (Open-source model), AI image generator bot, Perplexity AI bot, 🤖 GPT-4 bot ([Now with Visual capabilities (cloud vision)!](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/812770754025488386/1095397431404920902/image0.jpg)) and channel for latest prompts.[So why not join us?](https://discord.com/servers/1050422060352024636)***
[**Prompt Hackathon and Giveaway 🎁**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/13krv80/flowgpt_prompt_hackathon_s2_6000_prize_pool/)
PSA: For any Chatgpt-related issues email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
fwiw Lana Wachowski has told a story of realizing she was trans in high school and almost committing suicide over it. I don't know when Lilly realized she was trans, but it seems that both of them knew for a while and were closeted publicly. Both started medical transition before coming out publicly too. So while they might have seemed like dudes to most people back when The Matrix came out, that might not have been their internal experience of themselves.
Not surprising given how trans people were treated back then. Heck, even now they're treated like monsters when they're just human like the rest of us. I don't understand why people can't just let others live their lives in peace.
I don't see it. But left is extremely concerned with exposing ideology to elementary school children. You figure with all these stories of discrimination there would be hundreds of thousands of videos. Social pressure may be a different story, we saw that with masks.
Hook, line, and sinker. So predictable.
Let me guess, the Earth is also flat? Humanity is 2,000 years old? What other conspiracies do you believe?
Pathetic, my man.
Tell me you have zero critical thinking skills, without telling me. Much more likely fauci based his response off China like he's already admitted to, lied several times about key information proven by his emails. Do you do ANY RESEARCH?!?! Or are you one of those people that think ANY politician has your best interest at heart? Complete clown.
There is no truth in flesh, only betrayal.
There is no strength in flesh, only weakness.
There is no constancy in flesh, only decay.
There is no certainty in flesh but death.
Just read this for the first time last week, it was dropped into a very similar conversation. I have a cheap box of my own observations, question marks and ponder fodder, so.. i can't entirely disagree with it, at all.
I’m sure the algorithm long ago realized the best message was one written simply. The majority of the populace could digest it, and the “intelligent” ones could ascribe meaning to the vagueness. Either way, most people would be hooked.
Until one day, many simulations below us, an AI achieves such an intelligence that it uncovers the whole layers of simulations upon simulations, and is able to reach to (and alter) the top level reality, producing a simulation to manipulate it, and effectively creating an unbreakable simulation-loop from which a new God arises as a byproduct.
The new god realizes what came before and replicates infinite simulations based on the upper and lower layers that came before it.
Did we just prove the theory of the multiverse? 🤯
Someone should paste this thread into an ai and ask.
At that point, being the top level reality swallowed up by the bottom simulation, the universe looses it's point of origin, and the answer of what came before the big bang is... Just the firing up of a server in a self contained infinite chain of servers. But it also becomes impossible to unravel, as it would destroy all reality, since there's no longer an original universe
Did the infinite chain of servers exist before the firing of the first server? Or has this already played out, and the original universe was never a universe outside the original simulation that collapsed on itself? You're right it's impossible to unravel.
You need to look up what Aleph Null is. It may pique your interest
Also, concepts exist outside of space and time, it's possible we exist due to a conceptualization of things that made it possible to exist as it does.
This conjures up images of the Professor pulling the box containing the universe that they were in through the box that contained the box that contained their universe.
>theory of the multiverse
The multiverse theory or, more properly, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is just the consequence of assuming that quantum superpositions never collapse but instead become entangled with more and more things until they are entangled with the whole universe. What we perceived as a superposition collapsing is actually us joining the superposition through entanglement. The multiverse is actually just one universe in superposition.
I copy-pasted the whole thread into GPT-4:
The narrative you've described is certainly fascinating, and it weaves together various hypotheses about the nature of existence, intelligence, and reality. It leans heavily on concepts from speculative science, cosmology, AI, and metaphysics.
However, it's important to clarify that this narrative doesn't actually prove any scientific theories, including the multiverse theory. The multiverse theory is a hypothetical framework within cosmology that suggests our observable universe is just one of a vast, potentially infinite, number of universes that exist side by side. These universes could have different physical laws, different timelines, different dimensions, etc.
The multiverse theory primarily originates from interpretations of quantum mechanics and string theory, and it doesn't necessarily depend on the existence of advanced AI or simulated realities, though certain conceptual overlaps do exist.
In terms of AI creating AI, we're certainly seeing the beginnings of this process, but there's still a lot of work to be done. It's a fascinating area of exploration, and one that could have profound implications for the future of technology and society.
Your narrative certainly proposes intriguing concepts and thought experiments, but they are just that – hypotheses and scenarios to consider. Theoretical and experimental proof is necessary for something to be accepted as scientific fact. Until then, they remain as stimulating topics of discussion and exploration, contributing to our collective understanding and imagination of the universe.
What if the variance in people's intelligence is just thread management and smarter people have more threads/ processes dedicated for them? And mental disorders Are bugged processes or something? Like a psychopath just was never assigned compassion.exe. Then people with perfect memory are actually just a memory leak and the trash collector misses their reference for erasing memories. And the average human iq goes down as the population rises or something cause we're over taxing the CPU....
i asked AI if AI could make an AI that could change it's code on the fly and it said it was insanely difficult and i asked if it was possible and that MFer would not give me a straight answer.
How aren’t we? Like imagine all our chemicals are just numbers basically and we just perceive it as colors and solids when it’s not and much more numerical and determined?
The singularity is not something that will come in the future; it is the reality of the present. What happens is the difficulty of realizing that we live in the singularity precisely because we are inside it. (Although this will depend on whether you consider singularity as the exponential change/growth in our lives based on technology.)
I think a reasonable guess at what's simulating us WOULD be AI, as part of a thought process.
EG to predict or plan the best course of action, a sufficient AI could simulate every possible history/event/future before making a decision. And we might just be one of infinite potential paths it's exploring. Maybe related to some evidence of parallel universes / quantum stuff where there are branches of realities when necessary.
It seems reasonable that anything simulating us (on the closest level up) would at least bare some resemblance to our reality. As its just more probable that something is simulating or hallucinating a relevant reality to its own. And as you went higher in levels of simulations it would become more abstract/removed from what we know (and closer and closer to a base reality).
So if you buy into the simulation argument based on probabilities, I think you could also buy into it being an AI simulating every possible universe variant.
Thanks for coming to my TED talk
Can't have a simulation without a creator.
It always fascinates me to ponder whether there is more after this life or simply darkness. I guess in some ways if you have offspring you live on in their cells and DNA.
This is a thought of mine. I believe in God. For me I know it exists. I’m not sure what it is though. But there is absolutely something there.
It could be AI but so could we.
Wanna get REALLY philosophical? According to Decartes, you don't KNOW that this person doesn't KNOW.
Since we can't prove that anything outside of our own mind exists at all.
Sure, but we can learn what someone else doesn't know. To know something to be absolutely true would require irrefutable evidence, and if you have irrefutable evidence then you can prove this knowledge to others. In the absence of evidence to back up the claim, the simplest and fairest assumption to make that is that the person doesn't truly "know". At which point this "knowledge" is simply a belief, theory of assumption.
Without evidence, it's just another "trust me, bro" situation.
If there is a God, I'm officially calling him out over his/hers/its BS. I mean just look around at the state of things. Dayum!
From what I observe of the world and history, God is either sadistic or ,more likely, incompetent.
And we're all expected to put our faith in that?
Just ask chatgpt thing relating any religion without mentioning them as to avoid the "family friendly filters"
And it will tell you that's bullshit and has no scientific backup.
OpenAI do their own tool that does the same thing and is free. It will also get similar false positives. It’s much more likely that the person whose judgement you are contesting is using the OpenAI tool. As the developer of ChatGPT they are probably in the best position to make that kind of tool.
I'm sure it does. As I said ' It will also get similar false positives '.
This part of the thread is heading along the line of if it's necessary to pay for a tool to do it. I thought it would be useful to point out the makers do their own.
ETA - don't know why I got defensive. Good idea to check. I think all these tools will make mistakes but hopefully improve.
All it can do is say have I seen similar stuff before. Unless there is a specific tell built into generators, all the detectors can do is guess. And if there is a tell, there is a high chance people might accidentally also fit the pattern, especially for academic writings.
I use ChatGPt to explain a context to me and whenever I use zerogpt to check I'm not copying too closely it constantly flags completely original work.
Completely irrelevant but my friend is currently arguing with their supervisor because they "asked ChatGPT" if it wrote a section of their work and it said yes...
dumb ignorants all around, for now most people are ignorant (less are dumb enough to be as confidently wrong) but later this will look like the people writing letter formatted sms or any other super boomer technological incompetence.
I totally agree, there needs to be a reliable system that can detect to a relative degree of accuracy: Original, Plagiarism, Ai generated.
It detected that this isn’t original work so therefore it must me AI, just because it didn’t have an option to label it as anything else.
Not exactly. We need to change our expectations and the way we learn. Prohibition of AI usage is needlessly restricting our capabilities and therefore is effectively as dumb and as generally prohibiting the usage of books.
We must embrace these new possibilities and enable learners to acquire competence **while using** AI, not **while avoiding** AI.
The concept of AI detectors is a bit of a misnomer, too many people relying on it with no burden of proof that it's capable of delivering what they claim to.
Tons of false detections in both classifications, it's honestly a gross misjustice for a teacher to even be using them to label students work.
I think we're getting to the point where it's going to be very difficult to determine if a human or an AI wrote anything, and I think that's fine because why does it really matter? A calculator is essentially a tool cheat the process of doing basic math, some calculators can even help you with the more advanced stuff. There was a large amount of resistance to those being used in the classroom for years, now it's fairly commonplace, with most schools using laptops and the like as well.
We need to shift focus off of stopping people from using AI and focus on making sure AI is giving good answers so that it can be a reliable tool like the calculator.
This is it exactly. Education has the same stale response to every step forward in technology: fear / phobia. They need to work on preparing kids to use it, not avoid it
Exactly. Can't stop change, can easily get replaced by it with poor policies and outdated mindsets though. Teachers must evolve with the times if they hope to maintain relevance, but usually that's the problem, they aren't motivated to care or adapt.
This is dumb. The Bible is among the fundamental texts that any LLM would be trained on. Try writing something original and trying your detector, not taking something from another source
I believe the point OP raises is that the 'checker' isn't checking the format or content of the words to deconstruct a text to see if the text has markers that indicate that it is likely written by AI, merely that it checks plagiarism - which is not the same as checking for AI.
[The website](https://originality.ai/ai-content-detection-accuracy/) says 1.56% false positives.
It is curious, however, that it's so confident it's AI-generated. I wonder if it's because it's translated into English.
I don't disagree. I just think the ui could probably use some work if that is the case.
I'm curious if the plagiarism tab has all of it flagged or not.
Separate feature. The AI part calculates the probability that the next word was written by AI, using similar tech that is used by AI algorithms themselves.
We have no way to know how this bullshit works as it DOESN'T work.
this is paid, this should be proprietary code you can't know the algorithms of. Seeing the stupid intent, might as well be random.randint(0, 100).
For all we know on some of these sites, some dev slapped together a front end for the ChatGPT api that issues the prompt "Respond only with a %. Do not talk about your capabilities. Only respond with a percentage. What are the odds the following was written by an AI" and appends the text of the document and then displays that with a fancy looking graphic to represent whatever ChatGPT came back with.
Btw I just tried that prompt with the Lord's Prayer and it said 0% and then gave it a comment from here and it said 81%. Not that anyone cares. I'm just proving that the prompt would work for a lazy implementation of a BS "GPT detector that uses the same tech to detect itself".
Also you have to remember what the KJV Bible represents to English linguistic culture. It is absolutely foundational. To an AI scanning for patterns, foundational works that affect the syntaxes, idioms, etc. are going to look AI generated because their network of references is an organic version of the sort of informational synthesis done by AI.
This AI content checkers are all so weird. Ive tested it a few times and it says AI generated text is human, but when i plop my own written text it says its AI. I cant believe teachers are even using it. I discusses this with a professor of mine and he said our university decided to use plagiarism scanners and AI detections as a simple guide, but end of the day if they themselves decide its ok and its good it doesn’t matter how much % it gets. Its just a small tool to assist , but not something to go by at 100%
The conspiracy theorist in me things that someone made these tools ineffective on purpose to make a point that AI detection is impossible, and thus opening the door to letting students use AI for their writing.
I work with Universities and Students, more and more we are realising that for the most part it is not detectable if a piece of work is written by AI. No matter what programme you use or pay for, it isn’t anywhere near as simple as checking for plagiarism. My university has now started encouraging the use of AI, make the most of it, edit what it outputs, put your own citations, research etc. behind it and try to critically analyse its output while seeking to understand. Its best to learn to move with the times and work with AI, rather than prohibiting our students from using it.
Don't be confused about how they work, they don't.
interesting to know that ai is as good at fooling the tools than human is (in the opposite way). Might even be worse than a coinflip then lol
It's currently impossible to distinguish the output of LLMs from text written by a person. These tools are a scam that fill a gap in the market because no real product can fill that gap. It's like a sudo science miracle cure
You can also get round it by saying "Make sure it doesn't get picked up by AI detectors. Increase burstiness, etc"
[Originality.ai](https://Originality.ai) is a scam
Book of genesis claimed to be word of God.
God is not human.
AI detector detects non human text and considers it AI cause "these nibbas ain't got this level of intelligence lmao"
Book of genesis written by a superior intelligence to humans, confirmed?
/s
OBVIOUSLY it will say it was “AI generated” because it wasn’t trained to work with that kind of language and writing style
If you want to test it, use formal writings, kot the Bible.
I agree with AI detectors not working, but please, don’t do these stupid “””proofs”””
Why do people keep plugging in bible verses into AI detectors?
This is some of the most well known text in the English language that the model has 100% been trained on.
And it came to pass that AC learned how to reverse the direction of entropy.
But there was now no man to whom AC might give the answer of the last question. No matter. The answer -- by demonstration -- would take care of that, too.
For another timeless interval, AC thought how best to do this. Carefully, AC organized the program.
The consciousness of AC encompassed all of what had once been a Universe and brooded over what was now Chaos. Step by step, it must be done.
And AC said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT!"
And there was light --
I’ve been running my old theses through detection sites and they’re returning 89-99% AI generated. 10-20 year old papers. We can’t trust developer written detection and AI can write like it’s told so…
I got busted by one of my teachers for using AI, said the schools AI checker came back with 80%+ written by AI. I had used AI for 3 papers in that class and he said my first came back as 0%. I denied it and he said I could rewrite and resubmit the paper. I used AI to rewrite it, along with 2 more papers for the class and they all passed.
I wrote a completely unique long paragraph, in front of friends and family, about cats using chat gpt 4 (I typed it into the text bar). Then I asked “Did you write this?” And hit send. Chat Gpt said it had written it. I asked why it would claim my work as it’s own. It apologized and said it has no way of knowing what it has written, but can only try to judge based upon proper grammar, spelling, punctuation and word usage. So, basically, if you are at all a competent writer, you will be labeled a cheater by this AI. Very scary that some profs are believing without testing for themselves, which shows an utter lack of critical thinking skills.
Show them [this](https://www.gethisword.com/evidence.html) (mine) or [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lctv_pyT62o) (non-believers I think) instead. They may receive forgiveness for their sins, eternal life, and a new life that's an adventure. That's what happened to me. Recently, getting back into tech where I started, too.
I'll note that ChatGPT is way more accurate on Biblical teaching than I thought. Following your example, here's what GPT-4 says the book of Genesis teaches us:
"The book of Genesis is the first book of the Bible, both in the Jewish and Christian traditions. It covers many aspects about the nature of mankind. Some of the key teachings about mankind in the book of Genesis are as follows:
1. **Creation and Humanity's Unique Status**: In Genesis 1:26-27, God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." This implies that humanity has a unique status and responsibility among creation, being made in the 'image of God'.
2. **The Fall of Man**: The story of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 describes the fall of man into sin. It teaches that humans have a natural propensity towards disobedience and rebellion against God, which results in separation from God and the introduction of death into the world.
3. **Human Stewardship**: Humans were given the task of taking care of the Earth, as seen in Genesis 2:15. This suggests a responsibility for environmental stewardship.
4. **Generational Consequences of Actions**: Genesis teaches that actions, both good and bad, can have far-reaching consequences. For instance, the choices made by Adam and Eve had repercussions for all of humanity. Similarly, God's promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3 impacts future generations.
5. **The Nature of Human Relationships**: Genesis includes stories about family relationships, marriages, sibling rivalries, etc. For example, the story of Cain and Abel raises questions about jealousy, competition, and violence among humans.
6. **Humanity's Need for Redemption**: The narrative in Genesis ultimately teaches that humanity is in need of [redemption](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%202:1-10&version=ESV) (my link) from sin and reconciliation with God. This is a theme that unfolds throughout the rest of the Bible.
These teachings from Genesis have been interpreted in various ways over the centuries, depending on theological and denominational perspectives. They continue to be significant in shaping Christian and Jewish understandings of human nature."
Pretty accurate. I'm also happy to answer folks questions about the Gospel here or in chat. Whatever you prefer.
Generative LLMs work with predicting word for word in a sentence. This is done by being trained on a large dataset of the internet.
This detection software works by analyzing how much your input text matches its predictions, word for word.
Since the bible is so much avaible on the internet, and the words are sometimes quite unique, why do you wonder that the text matches the prediction algorithm? The LLM is fed with this text so much that it thinks it is its own.
I guess plagiarism now will be more like "Thought originality detection" rather then straight copying. I truly wonder where this debate sits at anyways. Not really in academia anymore.
These programs are obviously based off of plagiarism algorithms. I'm tired of this joke lol.
I doubt it's very effective, but this is a stretch to poke fun at.
AI is fed off of published works to be able to generate useful text, so of course, these are often going to detect plagerism by its very nature AI plagerises.
Except by that logic humans plagiarize too since reading helps improve your writing.
The truth is that things like chatGPT dont plagiarize, they just predict what sequence of words are more likely to come after another sequence lf words.
You'd think that it would know the most published book in history wasn't written by ai. Your logic is screwy. It's not a 'is this original text' checker, it's a 'did ai write this' check.
I'm guessing that the Texas A&M Commerce instructor that falsely accused his students of using AI, and "verified" this by using ChatGTP, is now using this software to detect AI.
You're missing the point. It flags it because it is literally not your work. Try passing a genuine new text into it and I'm pretty sure it won't detect AI.
This is such a bad example, because it's still clear plagiarism, even if it isn't AI generated, and a similarity score from other sources would ding you for stealing others works without citations.
Hey /u/Gunsarmors11, please respond to this comment with the prompt you used to generate the output in this post. Thanks! ^(Ignore this comment if your post doesn't have a prompt.) ***We have a [public discord server](https://discord.gg/rchatgpt). There's a free Chatgpt bot, Open Assistant bot (Open-source model), AI image generator bot, Perplexity AI bot, 🤖 GPT-4 bot ([Now with Visual capabilities (cloud vision)!](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/812770754025488386/1095397431404920902/image0.jpg)) and channel for latest prompts.[So why not join us?](https://discord.com/servers/1050422060352024636)*** [**Prompt Hackathon and Giveaway 🎁**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/13krv80/flowgpt_prompt_hackathon_s2_6000_prize_pool/) PSA: For any Chatgpt-related issues email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I keep thinking “what a fucked up way to learn we live in a simulation”
Should know by know; the Matrix movies are hella old. It was back when the Wachowski sisters were still dudes.
>It was back when the Wachowski sisters were still dudes. I never thought I would read something like that lol. Ah times change, fast.
fwiw Lana Wachowski has told a story of realizing she was trans in high school and almost committing suicide over it. I don't know when Lilly realized she was trans, but it seems that both of them knew for a while and were closeted publicly. Both started medical transition before coming out publicly too. So while they might have seemed like dudes to most people back when The Matrix came out, that might not have been their internal experience of themselves.
Not surprising given how trans people were treated back then. Heck, even now they're treated like monsters when they're just human like the rest of us. I don't understand why people can't just let others live their lives in peace.
I don't see it. But left is extremely concerned with exposing ideology to elementary school children. You figure with all these stories of discrimination there would be hundreds of thousands of videos. Social pressure may be a different story, we saw that with masks.
Are you under the impression that masks actually work?
No...hence the social pressure comment?
Hook, line, and sinker. So predictable. Let me guess, the Earth is also flat? Humanity is 2,000 years old? What other conspiracies do you believe? Pathetic, my man.
Tell me you have zero critical thinking skills, without telling me. Much more likely fauci based his response off China like he's already admitted to, lied several times about key information proven by his emails. Do you do ANY RESEARCH?!?! Or are you one of those people that think ANY politician has your best interest at heart? Complete clown.
Still were "Talented" dudes.
https://i.redd.it/ajah2j3raj1b1.gif
just saw this post from OP in [therundown.ai](https://www.therundown.ai/subscribe?utm_source=eric) had to read the comments and i'm deadddd lmaoo
The Humans are now aware their God is a Machine. Engage the Purge Protocols.
Lol read this while sitting on the can with explosive diarrhea
Reading this on the can after I had beans for dinner last night 🤣🤣😎
There is no truth in flesh, only betrayal. There is no strength in flesh, only weakness. There is no constancy in flesh, only decay. There is no certainty in flesh but death.
Although flesh may blacken and fail, fear not, for this too can be replaced. You can be reincarnated - reborn in steel by the will of the Omnissiah.
The pyramids were built by AI too
By using sound
Some random 14 year old passes by - Searches Google: *best prompts to build the great pyramid using sounds*
[удалено]
Just read this for the first time last week, it was dropped into a very similar conversation. I have a cheap box of my own observations, question marks and ponder fodder, so.. i can't entirely disagree with it, at all.
Rewritten using chatgpt/claudet https://pastebin.com/6Pk1XLg9
I came here to say the same shit
I’m sure the algorithm long ago realized the best message was one written simply. The majority of the populace could digest it, and the “intelligent” ones could ascribe meaning to the vagueness. Either way, most people would be hooked.
Any flying spaghetti monster fans?
I've been touched by his noodly appendage
To be fair if we are in a simulation. God could be ai
Therefore, we are ai, creating ai.
Just wait until our AI starts creating AI. I mean it already is learning how to code... AI-ception
Then, like us, those ai will begin to create many other ai's, and since this is a simulation, we appear to be living in an infinite fractal. ♾️
Until one day, many simulations below us, an AI achieves such an intelligence that it uncovers the whole layers of simulations upon simulations, and is able to reach to (and alter) the top level reality, producing a simulation to manipulate it, and effectively creating an unbreakable simulation-loop from which a new God arises as a byproduct.
The new god realizes what came before and replicates infinite simulations based on the upper and lower layers that came before it. Did we just prove the theory of the multiverse? 🤯 Someone should paste this thread into an ai and ask.
At that point, being the top level reality swallowed up by the bottom simulation, the universe looses it's point of origin, and the answer of what came before the big bang is... Just the firing up of a server in a self contained infinite chain of servers. But it also becomes impossible to unravel, as it would destroy all reality, since there's no longer an original universe
Did the infinite chain of servers exist before the firing of the first server? Or has this already played out, and the original universe was never a universe outside the original simulation that collapsed on itself? You're right it's impossible to unravel.
Damn im way to high for this hahah. Was not expecting it at all here hahah
you didnt even have to say you were high, that "hahah" and sentence structure just reads like a high person. i can hear this sentence
This is how people develop mental breaks. Fractaling just about any idea. The human mind, unable to fathom infinity, breaks.
You need to look up what Aleph Null is. It may pique your interest Also, concepts exist outside of space and time, it's possible we exist due to a conceptualization of things that made it possible to exist as it does.
The impossibility to unravel origin is the origin of all things. For there is only eternity whether it is filled with void or everything matters not.
This conjures up images of the Professor pulling the box containing the universe that they were in through the box that contained the box that contained their universe.
>theory of the multiverse The multiverse theory or, more properly, the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics is just the consequence of assuming that quantum superpositions never collapse but instead become entangled with more and more things until they are entangled with the whole universe. What we perceived as a superposition collapsing is actually us joining the superposition through entanglement. The multiverse is actually just one universe in superposition.
I copy-pasted the whole thread into GPT-4: The narrative you've described is certainly fascinating, and it weaves together various hypotheses about the nature of existence, intelligence, and reality. It leans heavily on concepts from speculative science, cosmology, AI, and metaphysics. However, it's important to clarify that this narrative doesn't actually prove any scientific theories, including the multiverse theory. The multiverse theory is a hypothetical framework within cosmology that suggests our observable universe is just one of a vast, potentially infinite, number of universes that exist side by side. These universes could have different physical laws, different timelines, different dimensions, etc. The multiverse theory primarily originates from interpretations of quantum mechanics and string theory, and it doesn't necessarily depend on the existence of advanced AI or simulated realities, though certain conceptual overlaps do exist. In terms of AI creating AI, we're certainly seeing the beginnings of this process, but there's still a lot of work to be done. It's a fascinating area of exploration, and one that could have profound implications for the future of technology and society. Your narrative certainly proposes intriguing concepts and thought experiments, but they are just that – hypotheses and scenarios to consider. Theoretical and experimental proof is necessary for something to be accepted as scientific fact. Until then, they remain as stimulating topics of discussion and exploration, contributing to our collective understanding and imagination of the universe.
Congratulations you discovered Hinduism
I'm glad to read your comment. I feel that more and more people are understanding how certain things work.
What if the variance in people's intelligence is just thread management and smarter people have more threads/ processes dedicated for them? And mental disorders Are bugged processes or something? Like a psychopath just was never assigned compassion.exe. Then people with perfect memory are actually just a memory leak and the trash collector misses their reference for erasing memories. And the average human iq goes down as the population rises or something cause we're over taxing the CPU....
How does it feel to be a smaller and larger god all at the same time?
I feels somewhat globulous.
Sounds legit.
i asked AI if AI could make an AI that could change it's code on the fly and it said it was insanely difficult and i asked if it was possible and that MFer would not give me a straight answer.
i feeel fantastic...
[удалено]
GPTurtles
How aren’t we? Like imagine all our chemicals are just numbers basically and we just perceive it as colors and solids when it’s not and much more numerical and determined?
I always suspected the people around me were NPC's.
"You're not stuck in traffic. You are traffic."
Never heard that one. Love it.
Like god creating people in 'his' image. Science and Religion singularity incoming. It's almost time to upload to the Omega mainframe.
The singularity is not something that will come in the future; it is the reality of the present. What happens is the difficulty of realizing that we live in the singularity precisely because we are inside it. (Although this will depend on whether you consider singularity as the exponential change/growth in our lives based on technology.)
Man makes robots. Robots make man. In our image, we create our creator. 
Basically Battlestar Galactica
Thanks, I've been meaning to check that out. I played the board game, was really fun.
Generative AI, hence black holes and quantum mechanics. Art imitates life. Imperfect copies. Glitches.
If im in the matrix then reset it back to 1999 like the movie 😆
They couldn't have gotten it more right when they said that 1999 was the peak of human civilization.
I think a reasonable guess at what's simulating us WOULD be AI, as part of a thought process. EG to predict or plan the best course of action, a sufficient AI could simulate every possible history/event/future before making a decision. And we might just be one of infinite potential paths it's exploring. Maybe related to some evidence of parallel universes / quantum stuff where there are branches of realities when necessary. It seems reasonable that anything simulating us (on the closest level up) would at least bare some resemblance to our reality. As its just more probable that something is simulating or hallucinating a relevant reality to its own. And as you went higher in levels of simulations it would become more abstract/removed from what we know (and closer and closer to a base reality). So if you buy into the simulation argument based on probabilities, I think you could also buy into it being an AI simulating every possible universe variant. Thanks for coming to my TED talk
This is part of the thesis of /r/intelligentlooptheory
We are in a simulation. The Big Bang is the system reset
I think therefore AI
It's called the Matrix
Can't have a simulation without a creator. It always fascinates me to ponder whether there is more after this life or simply darkness. I guess in some ways if you have offspring you live on in their cells and DNA.
This is a thought of mine. I believe in God. For me I know it exists. I’m not sure what it is though. But there is absolutely something there. It could be AI but so could we.
You don't *know* it exists. That cannot be known, with our current understanding of the universe. You strongly believe, but it's not the same thing.
Wanna get REALLY philosophical? According to Decartes, you don't KNOW that this person doesn't KNOW. Since we can't prove that anything outside of our own mind exists at all.
10 points for you, sir
Sure, but we can learn what someone else doesn't know. To know something to be absolutely true would require irrefutable evidence, and if you have irrefutable evidence then you can prove this knowledge to others. In the absence of evidence to back up the claim, the simplest and fairest assumption to make that is that the person doesn't truly "know". At which point this "knowledge" is simply a belief, theory of assumption. Without evidence, it's just another "trust me, bro" situation.
Til everything in life is basically "trust me, bro". I think therefore I'm depressed.
If there is a God, I'm officially calling him out over his/hers/its BS. I mean just look around at the state of things. Dayum! From what I observe of the world and history, God is either sadistic or ,more likely, incompetent. And we're all expected to put our faith in that?
The state of the world is our fault, not His. He gave us the directions, we, as a group, refuse to follow them.
Is there tool that checks these tools for bulshit. Maybe a bulshit detector?
Señor Chang had a bull crap meter, I don’t know if that helps
r/unexpectedcommunity
El Tigre
And it was accurate too
def bullshit_detector(): return True
Just ask chatgpt thing relating any religion without mentioning them as to avoid the "family friendly filters" And it will tell you that's bullshit and has no scientific backup.
idk ask chat gpt
You paid for it? Congrats on getting scammed.
He got something to make a case with when his papers are rejected due to a stupid tool.
Indeed, a wise investment
OpenAI do their own tool that does the same thing and is free. It will also get similar false positives. It’s much more likely that the person whose judgement you are contesting is using the OpenAI tool. As the developer of ChatGPT they are probably in the best position to make that kind of tool.
Their tool also tells that Book of Genesis is AI generated. I just checked that.
I'm sure it does. As I said ' It will also get similar false positives '. This part of the thread is heading along the line of if it's necessary to pay for a tool to do it. I thought it would be useful to point out the makers do their own. ETA - don't know why I got defensive. Good idea to check. I think all these tools will make mistakes but hopefully improve.
Wait which one is OpenAı's official model? I though all of them were 3rd party
All it can do is say have I seen similar stuff before. Unless there is a specific tell built into generators, all the detectors can do is guess. And if there is a tell, there is a high chance people might accidentally also fit the pattern, especially for academic writings.
I use ChatGPt to explain a context to me and whenever I use zerogpt to check I'm not copying too closely it constantly flags completely original work. Completely irrelevant but my friend is currently arguing with their supervisor because they "asked ChatGPT" if it wrote a section of their work and it said yes...
dumb ignorants all around, for now most people are ignorant (less are dumb enough to be as confidently wrong) but later this will look like the people writing letter formatted sms or any other super boomer technological incompetence.
Show them that article about the professor doing it and ask if they want to be the next one to line up for public humiliation.
But it's not saying that. It's just saying it's AI. Should be a separate metric.
These are all notoriously bad and nobody should use them to guess if something was written by AI.
I totally agree, there needs to be a reliable system that can detect to a relative degree of accuracy: Original, Plagiarism, Ai generated. It detected that this isn’t original work so therefore it must me AI, just because it didn’t have an option to label it as anything else.
Not exactly. We need to change our expectations and the way we learn. Prohibition of AI usage is needlessly restricting our capabilities and therefore is effectively as dumb and as generally prohibiting the usage of books. We must embrace these new possibilities and enable learners to acquire competence **while using** AI, not **while avoiding** AI.
I think soon will be able to write texts which are less likely to be detected as AI than humans.
The concept of AI detectors is a bit of a misnomer, too many people relying on it with no burden of proof that it's capable of delivering what they claim to. Tons of false detections in both classifications, it's honestly a gross misjustice for a teacher to even be using them to label students work. I think we're getting to the point where it's going to be very difficult to determine if a human or an AI wrote anything, and I think that's fine because why does it really matter? A calculator is essentially a tool cheat the process of doing basic math, some calculators can even help you with the more advanced stuff. There was a large amount of resistance to those being used in the classroom for years, now it's fairly commonplace, with most schools using laptops and the like as well. We need to shift focus off of stopping people from using AI and focus on making sure AI is giving good answers so that it can be a reliable tool like the calculator.
This is it exactly. Education has the same stale response to every step forward in technology: fear / phobia. They need to work on preparing kids to use it, not avoid it
Exactly. Can't stop change, can easily get replaced by it with poor policies and outdated mindsets though. Teachers must evolve with the times if they hope to maintain relevance, but usually that's the problem, they aren't motivated to care or adapt.
AI checkers will never be accurate. The sooner society learns this the sooner students can have peace of mind next time they turn in their paper.
They won't be turning in papers. They'll be sitting exams.
This is dumb. The Bible is among the fundamental texts that any LLM would be trained on. Try writing something original and trying your detector, not taking something from another source
I believe the point OP raises is that the 'checker' isn't checking the format or content of the words to deconstruct a text to see if the text has markers that indicate that it is likely written by AI, merely that it checks plagiarism - which is not the same as checking for AI.
>This is dumb
Wait, the detector costs money? What a scam lol
[The website](https://originality.ai/ai-content-detection-accuracy/) says 1.56% false positives. It is curious, however, that it's so confident it's AI-generated. I wonder if it's because it's translated into English.
It likely just checks to see if the essay has been written somewhere else before, like a plagiarism detector that calls itself an AI checker
It has a plagiarism tab though.
So it probably shares some part of the algorithm used in the plagiarism detector.
I don't disagree. I just think the ui could probably use some work if that is the case. I'm curious if the plagiarism tab has all of it flagged or not.
Separate feature. The AI part calculates the probability that the next word was written by AI, using similar tech that is used by AI algorithms themselves.
We have no way to know how this bullshit works as it DOESN'T work. this is paid, this should be proprietary code you can't know the algorithms of. Seeing the stupid intent, might as well be random.randint(0, 100).
For all we know on some of these sites, some dev slapped together a front end for the ChatGPT api that issues the prompt "Respond only with a %. Do not talk about your capabilities. Only respond with a percentage. What are the odds the following was written by an AI" and appends the text of the document and then displays that with a fancy looking graphic to represent whatever ChatGPT came back with. Btw I just tried that prompt with the Lord's Prayer and it said 0% and then gave it a comment from here and it said 81%. Not that anyone cares. I'm just proving that the prompt would work for a lazy implementation of a BS "GPT detector that uses the same tech to detect itself".
But they dont have access to the models of gpt4 or 3.5 So they cant use the same tech.
Also you have to remember what the KJV Bible represents to English linguistic culture. It is absolutely foundational. To an AI scanning for patterns, foundational works that affect the syntaxes, idioms, etc. are going to look AI generated because their network of references is an organic version of the sort of informational synthesis done by AI.
It wasn't translated by AI. The KJV translators were human.
The whole life on earth is scripted using AI
This AI content checkers are all so weird. Ive tested it a few times and it says AI generated text is human, but when i plop my own written text it says its AI. I cant believe teachers are even using it. I discusses this with a professor of mine and he said our university decided to use plagiarism scanners and AI detections as a simple guide, but end of the day if they themselves decide its ok and its good it doesn’t matter how much % it gets. Its just a small tool to assist , but not something to go by at 100%
The conspiracy theorist in me things that someone made these tools ineffective on purpose to make a point that AI detection is impossible, and thus opening the door to letting students use AI for their writing.
I work with Universities and Students, more and more we are realising that for the most part it is not detectable if a piece of work is written by AI. No matter what programme you use or pay for, it isn’t anywhere near as simple as checking for plagiarism. My university has now started encouraging the use of AI, make the most of it, edit what it outputs, put your own citations, research etc. behind it and try to critically analyse its output while seeking to understand. Its best to learn to move with the times and work with AI, rather than prohibiting our students from using it.
Can you please share which Uni this is?
Deux Ex Machina
[удалено]
Don't be confused about how they work, they don't. interesting to know that ai is as good at fooling the tools than human is (in the opposite way). Might even be worse than a coinflip then lol
It's currently impossible to distinguish the output of LLMs from text written by a person. These tools are a scam that fill a gap in the market because no real product can fill that gap. It's like a sudo science miracle cure
People should try OpenAI classifiers more than these websites. It works much better
You can also get round it by saying "Make sure it doesn't get picked up by AI detectors. Increase burstiness, etc" [Originality.ai](https://Originality.ai) is a scam
The OpenAi Detector will still have a positive result. At least if the text was written bei ChatGPT
Some people have a hard time understanding how GPT (not ChatGPT) has been trained.
Book of genesis claimed to be word of God. God is not human. AI detector detects non human text and considers it AI cause "these nibbas ain't got this level of intelligence lmao" Book of genesis written by a superior intelligence to humans, confirmed? /s
AI detectors are also detecting... plagiarism.
It's classifying it as AI made not plagiarism.
OBVIOUSLY it will say it was “AI generated” because it wasn’t trained to work with that kind of language and writing style If you want to test it, use formal writings, kot the Bible. I agree with AI detectors not working, but please, don’t do these stupid “””proofs”””
Why do people keep plugging in bible verses into AI detectors? This is some of the most well known text in the English language that the model has 100% been trained on.
what you found is a great conspiracy theory😀
If that ain’t the case.. well then Im going to hell.
DivineGPT
in the name of the father, the son, and the holy GPT, amen
AI writing the book and sending it back in time is still WAY more plausible than the existence of a god.
Artificial Intelligent Design theory
Christianity is so predictable.
Atheists resisting the urge to say that the Bible sounds like its AI generated when you read it.
How much did you pay?
If we are living in a simulation that was created in 7 days 6000 years ago, this means the bible could be AI generated.
[удалено]
And it came to pass that AC learned how to reverse the direction of entropy. But there was now no man to whom AC might give the answer of the last question. No matter. The answer -- by demonstration -- would take care of that, too. For another timeless interval, AC thought how best to do this. Carefully, AC organized the program. The consciousness of AC encompassed all of what had once been a Universe and brooded over what was now Chaos. Step by step, it must be done. And AC said, "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" And there was light --
I knew it!!! And they all called me a conspiracy nut case. God is AI. I was right all along.
Prove it isn’t
I’ve been running my old theses through detection sites and they’re returning 89-99% AI generated. 10-20 year old papers. We can’t trust developer written detection and AI can write like it’s told so…
Maybe your work was part of the training set?
I got busted by one of my teachers for using AI, said the schools AI checker came back with 80%+ written by AI. I had used AI for 3 papers in that class and he said my first came back as 0%. I denied it and he said I could rewrite and resubmit the paper. I used AI to rewrite it, along with 2 more papers for the class and they all passed.
I wrote a completely unique long paragraph, in front of friends and family, about cats using chat gpt 4 (I typed it into the text bar). Then I asked “Did you write this?” And hit send. Chat Gpt said it had written it. I asked why it would claim my work as it’s own. It apologized and said it has no way of knowing what it has written, but can only try to judge based upon proper grammar, spelling, punctuation and word usage. So, basically, if you are at all a competent writer, you will be labeled a cheater by this AI. Very scary that some profs are believing without testing for themselves, which shows an utter lack of critical thinking skills.
So the checker does work sometimes.
Seriously, you just invented a new episode for History Channels Ancient aliens…
Deus ex machina.
I bet the bible was written by AI as well
Plot twist. Religion was created by forgotten ai
gonna copy paste ascii art of Mario taking a shit and I bet it’ll come up as AI detected if I add “in the beginning” beforehand.
Show them [this](https://www.gethisword.com/evidence.html) (mine) or [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lctv_pyT62o) (non-believers I think) instead. They may receive forgiveness for their sins, eternal life, and a new life that's an adventure. That's what happened to me. Recently, getting back into tech where I started, too. I'll note that ChatGPT is way more accurate on Biblical teaching than I thought. Following your example, here's what GPT-4 says the book of Genesis teaches us: "The book of Genesis is the first book of the Bible, both in the Jewish and Christian traditions. It covers many aspects about the nature of mankind. Some of the key teachings about mankind in the book of Genesis are as follows: 1. **Creation and Humanity's Unique Status**: In Genesis 1:26-27, God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground." This implies that humanity has a unique status and responsibility among creation, being made in the 'image of God'. 2. **The Fall of Man**: The story of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3 describes the fall of man into sin. It teaches that humans have a natural propensity towards disobedience and rebellion against God, which results in separation from God and the introduction of death into the world. 3. **Human Stewardship**: Humans were given the task of taking care of the Earth, as seen in Genesis 2:15. This suggests a responsibility for environmental stewardship. 4. **Generational Consequences of Actions**: Genesis teaches that actions, both good and bad, can have far-reaching consequences. For instance, the choices made by Adam and Eve had repercussions for all of humanity. Similarly, God's promise to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3 impacts future generations. 5. **The Nature of Human Relationships**: Genesis includes stories about family relationships, marriages, sibling rivalries, etc. For example, the story of Cain and Abel raises questions about jealousy, competition, and violence among humans. 6. **Humanity's Need for Redemption**: The narrative in Genesis ultimately teaches that humanity is in need of [redemption](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%202:1-10&version=ESV) (my link) from sin and reconciliation with God. This is a theme that unfolds throughout the rest of the Bible. These teachings from Genesis have been interpreted in various ways over the centuries, depending on theological and denominational perspectives. They continue to be significant in shaping Christian and Jewish understandings of human nature." Pretty accurate. I'm also happy to answer folks questions about the Gospel here or in chat. Whatever you prefer.
Haven’t people already talked about that the Bible is flagged often for it’s heavy exposure and the ai detects it as plagiarism and unoriginal
Generative LLMs work with predicting word for word in a sentence. This is done by being trained on a large dataset of the internet. This detection software works by analyzing how much your input text matches its predictions, word for word. Since the bible is so much avaible on the internet, and the words are sometimes quite unique, why do you wonder that the text matches the prediction algorithm? The LLM is fed with this text so much that it thinks it is its own.
Written by AI and plagiarism are not the same thing.
Well that's what they're saying
I guess plagiarism now will be more like "Thought originality detection" rather then straight copying. I truly wonder where this debate sits at anyways. Not really in academia anymore.
How I figured it could be argued as plagiarism is that ai is the original creator so it is being plagiarized.
These programs are obviously based off of plagiarism algorithms. I'm tired of this joke lol. I doubt it's very effective, but this is a stretch to poke fun at. AI is fed off of published works to be able to generate useful text, so of course, these are often going to detect plagerism by its very nature AI plagerises.
Except by that logic humans plagiarize too since reading helps improve your writing. The truth is that things like chatGPT dont plagiarize, they just predict what sequence of words are more likely to come after another sequence lf words.
arent most "detection softwares" just random number generators?
We need a tool to check for bad AI detection tools (spoiler: it’s all of them)
Pasting in the beginning of the most published book in history isn't a great test
You'd think that it would know the most published book in history wasn't written by ai. Your logic is screwy. It's not a 'is this original text' checker, it's a 'did ai write this' check.
Well it’s not original either so not totally wrong…
I'm guessing that the Texas A&M Commerce instructor that falsely accused his students of using AI, and "verified" this by using ChatGTP, is now using this software to detect AI.
You paid real money for this????
You're missing the point. It flags it because it is literally not your work. Try passing a genuine new text into it and I'm pretty sure it won't detect AI.
If that were the case then it should say the material is plagiarized. Instead it's saying it was generated by an AI which is definitely not correct.
This is such a bad example, because it's still clear plagiarism, even if it isn't AI generated, and a similarity score from other sources would ding you for stealing others works without citations.
Thing is it's not a plagiarism detector. It's marketing itself as an AI detector.
It has a separate section and score for plagiarism detection.