bump

And couldn't your comment be applicable to you as well? People "are not coming back" to Imgur because one time 3 years ago they couldn't resize a picture. Seems the case to me.

What I do is tightly connected to graphics and imagery of any kind. I use different image hosting services for different needs. Often times I have to use something else I used to use. I know what works best for me.

I can use "talkimg" but it is a new service that can be dead in a couple of years. Besides, it allows embeds only to BitcoinTalk - I don't want to have an image hosting account for each forum/social media site.

I have been using Imgbb but it is slower and less convenient than Imgur. There are probably other alternatives designed for image snippets/screenshots that I haven't tried, but the ones I tried are no good. Most importantly I've never had issues with Imgur and it does what it is supposed to do.

- Their user experience. For me, it is easier to upload, group, and locate my images.
- Ability to choose image sizes to reference to (many other services don't have that).
- Speed. I find their servers to be much faster than other image hosts.

There are dozens of posts on the forum about invalid Imgur URLs, they eventually get resolved by the forum support but judging by the conversations it happens often.

Imgur is much better than other services in my opinion, and I would like to continue using it, but I currently can't. I hope this is a temporary restriction.

When I tried to insert images hosted on Imgur into my posts, I got this error "Embedding Imgur links is not supported in new posts". After reading other posts on the issue I understood that there have been frequent issues with Imgur and this is probably the reason Imgur was restricted on the forum to prevent future issues. So, I decided to create a list of alternatives to Imgur (The list will be updated, I just want to try each of them myself before I include links):

• imgbb.com
• talkimg.com
• imageshack.com

bump

The person you used as an example has fully embraced the technology - almost all of their recent posts are AI-generated. Soon, almost everyone will use language models or at least try them in their online communications. This is just to support my other comment about the future ease of access to large language models and why they will be very different from the common spam tools. These LLM apps will be everywhere, in browsers, email clients, virtual assistants, etc, available to every forum user, regardless of their level of technical skill.

Execution by guillotine.

Bump

Sorry, I missed your question.

I used the tool on my last reply (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5448111.msg62129192#msg62129192) that contains generated content and this is the result (had to paste the text twice though because of the limit):



I also tried to generate longer text in "normal" English with prompts designed to produce output that is not identifiable by these detection tools (without putting too much work, no more than a spammer would) and it catches most of them pretty well. The lowest percentage I got was 60%. This is one of the better tools. Interested to see how it performs when GPT 5 comes out.

Bump.

The forum soon will be overrun with low quality AI generated posts, just because there is a financial gain in it, it is easy to do and the tools are available to everyone.

The first step is to include in the forum policy that AI generated content is not allowed. Most people spamming the forum won't care about the quality of the output, won't spend crafting prompts, so it will be easy to spot and ban the offenders.

More complicated cases will have to be left to the mods discretion. Because the technology is changing rapidly, today's criteria may not be applicable in a couple of months.

ChatGPT is not a paraphrasing tool, it's a language processing model. You asked it to give you something, it gave you what you asked. If you ask what something means, it may pull a definition from Encyclopedia Britannica.

If you need to paraphrase something, you need to specifically ask it to do so. You caught nothing.

It seems like you replied without giving much thought to my comments. If you use AI as a tool to supplement and speed up your process to create something helpful in response to others - it's an interaction. If you copy-paste AI responses then - yes, there is not much value to it.

I'm not talking about using answers directly from AI and pasting them here. And by the way, it is not the standard response for everyone. The response will depend on the prompt you supply to AI. The more knowledgeable you are and the more information you put in the prompt, the more interesting and unique response you will get.

Sometimes talking to a human can be worse than talking to the bots, and not the AI-powered ones, just those primitive spinner bots, not capable of going a little beyond the script and just repeating what the other guy said just a few posts before. People give too much credit to their creativity and uniqueness.

Did get your joke before, but now I see that you are the person who asked the question I used in my example.

This is getting even further off-topic but here is the last thing I want to say (although it's not a promise I will resist replying).

ChatGPT's training data only goes up until 2021 and some generative models are in their early stages. But they evolve with remarkable speed.

And yeah, you didn't need to create that topic. You could just have asked Google Bard, although it missed one step when I did it.

I don't understand your statement about not needing to create a topic if it was any useful. Perhaps the smiley face indicates that it is a joke, but I don't get it. I gave an example of how AI can save time and produce value by creating a reply to this topic (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5449330.0) where the poster asks about the possibility of lowering gas fees.

I can see how this applies to the majority of (spam) cases but not to the example I gave and similar cases. Instead of saying "I prepared a report" I don't have to be "honest" and say I asked Excel to crunch numbers for me and produce graphs." Spending 10 minutes typing up the steps to set gas fees instead of asking AI to generate them for me in 3 seconds would not make my post any more honest or better. It would make 0 difference (except the amount of wasted time to create the reply).

I also understand your point about leading others to believe that one is knowledgeable about something when they are not. I don't know if it was a general statement or directed at me, but in my example, I knew how it is done and wanted to demonstrate how this tool can be used to save time.


It is a tool. Blaming a tool entirely for a problem is not fair. How you use it determines the outcome. None of my examples were like that. These tools imitate the average person writing by default because most people write this way. But you can easily change that by asking to write the responses, for example, in Ernest Hemingway's literary style. Try it.



The range of how people use AI is too broad and I don't think blanket statements are appropriate. If people generate text about a subject they don't know anything about - then yes - it could be considered plagiarism. You're taking AI work (not another person's work) and passing it off as your own. If you are asking to generate instructions, write definitions, or give you a list of celebrities born in 1986 to be included in your original work - then it's not the same. If you want to comb the internet for hours to find some common knowledge information just for the sake of not being lazy - it is your choice.

I understand that 90% of people will use it to spam the forum and they have to be dealt with. I never argued against that. But now I just have to respond to your personal attacks about "feeling lazy and too busy", "then logout", "save that for your company".


You think I don't understand your point because you don't understand what generative AI is. You even call them chatbots. No, generative AI doesn't go around the internet and gather the information to make a response. Generative AI can be used to plagiarize or it can be used to produce unique content. I'm going to give you a few examples by addressing your other "points".


Here is a quick example. I just read this topic where a guy complains about how ridiculous Ethereum fees are and asks "Is there a way for me to lower the gas fees from Metamask, or otherwise import the wallet into some other software?" I could write a reply to him saying, "Hey, sure there is a way. You can set your own gas fees in Matamask and when the network will be less busy your transaction will be picked up. Here is how:"

And then I would ask AI "Give me instructions on how to set gas fees in Metamask." I would get this:

• When you are about to make a transaction, click on the word "Market" above the estimated gas fee.
• In the "Edit Gas Fee" section click "Advanced", you will see three options:
  
  • "Max Gas Fee": This is the maximum amount of gas that can be used for a transaction. If you set this too low, your transaction may fail. If you set it too high, you may pay more than you need to.
  • "Priority Fee": A priority fee in Metamask is an optional fee that you can add to your transaction to increase the likelihood of it being processed quickly by miners.
• Once you have set your gas fee, click on "Save" to apply the changes.

See? I interact and exchange ideas based on what is in my mind. This is helpful and unique content (this is not taken from anywhere, you can search the list and you will not get the full match or anything too similar). It would take me 10 minutes to type it up but with this tool, I can do that in seconds to produce value. It doesn't matter who wrote this bit. If you call this being lazy, well, good luck churning your own butter, don't know what to tell you.

Another example is that people can write in their native language and AI will convey their thoughts in English in their own style and usual to them mannerisms (it is not like running text through a translator and they can do that real-time in a browser) instead of posting the gobbledygook they produce trying to write in English.

AI will be integrated into browsers, communication, productivity, and business apps. It will enhance the auto-complete feature on phones. Telling people to keep the technology for themselves won't work. This is why I think "chatbots" would be special.

Plagiarism is stealing others' work. It is unethical at the least. Some people think that generative AI is a rephrasing bot. It is not. I get what you're saying (and others in this thread) - there should be ways to prevent generated spam (which now is extremely easy to produce) from people whose only goal is financial gain. But, fighting AI is not the right approach. Not everyone who uses AI is lazy and doesn't add to the organic discussion. But my main point is that those anti-measures won't work. This is a losing battle. A more effective approach would be combating babble, AI or not AI.


Write a response to this statement "AI used by everyone to generate texts so that they can communicate to their colleagues, who are also using AI to generate responses? Come on... you know how silly it sounds", incorporate that saying that something is silly doesn't make it silly and doesn't help the argument and that many professionals already use AI tools to communicate efficiently. Make the response concise.


By the way, the company I for integrating AI tools to streamline communication.

I understand that and I completely agree that people will abuse it for financial gain or just get lazy. But those tools listed in the post (or any others) don't work. AI models evolve so rapidly that by the time the countermeasures are released - they are completely useless or you can just tell AI to avoid the patterns that will make the content identifiable as AI. While I agree with everything, the fight against AI is just tilting at windmills.