Quote from: odolvlobo on March 04, 2025, 08:57:22 PM

Also, automated AI detection has a very high rate of false positives.

Source for that? As I said in the other thread I've checked a few of my posts and they usually come out as 0% but sometimes like 10% or 15% AI generated (which is false). That doesn't look as false positive to me.

Quote from: lovesmayfamilis on March 05, 2025, 12:47:44 PM

The check was done on only two sites, which is not enough. After 2 posts, I am not sure that it is necessary to leave tags about the person being an AI spammer.
Besides, this topic should also be in the reputation section.

I am just following the rules of the thread you also use:

Quote from: nutildah on June 16, 2023, 07:14:10 AM

At least 2 of the 7 AI content detectors mentioned below must give a result of the post having a strong likelihood of containing AI-written material (

On the other hand it is two posts out of two that I checked, and both showed up as AI generated. That's 100% of the sample, albeit a small one. And look I'm all for some use of AI but you making copy paste from an AI without citing the source in tho cases and as a result earning a neutral tag about it doesn't seem far fetched to me at all.

Apart from that, look at this:

Quote from: nutildah on March 05, 2025, 08:27:33 PM

Sapling.ai: 100% Fake
Copyleaks: 100% AI-generated
ZeroGPT: 52.54% generated by AI/GPT
GPTZero: 100% Probability AI generated
QuillBot: 65% of text is likely AI
Undetectable.ai: Likely 99% AI

So 6 detectors suggest the post is substantially (or completely) written by AI.