Thanks for the cool project!
lcamtuf's survey (linked in the footer) was looking at the front page, and the number there was quite a bit higher. So there's likely some effect from voting, although I haven't dug into that yet.
I think Algolia has a way to filter for front-page stories, which should make it pretty easy to add. I haven't tested that yet though but will certainly look into it!
But then the authors lie or make ludicrous excuses for why their article "sounds" like AI. Then I check with Pangram and yep. It is completely AI written.
You get a few free checks on Pangram each day or so. Just start checking and encourage people to be honest.
AI has its place. Lying about it and misrepresenting it makes everyone dislike AI more, even as they use it themselves.
“AI detectors” do NOT work reliably.
Even humans who are ever-so-certain about being able to identify AI usage constantly embarrass themselves when that claimed ability is put to the test. Look up “AI Monet Instagram” for a social experiment where hundreds of cocksure users pointed out “AI signs” in what was claimed to be an AI-generated painting in the style of Monet, but was actually a genuine Monet.
Pass enough of someone's work through one, such as Pangram with a low FPR, and you can gain confidence.
Add in your own intuition plus multiple scans of someone's work, plus any weird claims they make, and you can raise the certainy bar.
There is room for error, but come on. To say they don't work at all and you can't combine multiple methods to come to reasonable conclusions?
I'll accept it is with fault. The problem could be alleviated if people just were honest about the use of generative AI usage and others didn't judge so harshly the use rather than the outcome.
I said at the start I don't care if it was used. I just want honesty.
That is, if you claim that something posted by someone else is written by AI, and that turns out to not be the case, do you accept that others have the right to call you a liar and a fraud?
Or is it that when you say “I just want honesty”, you really mean “I just want to be able to throw around accusations of AI usage based on my hunches and a number displayed on a website”?
If you see:
- ALL CAPS subheaders
- a light beige background
- burnt sienna anchor and/or highlight text
- a "• LIVE" (or really any pulsing • symbol with an ALL CAPS follow-up)
- tons of variation in font sizes (this one has 15 different text sizes!)
- more typically, a lot of overexplaining
...you know it's vibe'd, specifically with Claude!
It is also interesting to note that I have already received 5 AI written emails to the email I linked in the footer.
I think I misunderstood - how many posts were about AI vs how many posts were written by AI.
I obviously am suffering from berry fog.