Return to Answer

Rely on community-delegated moderation

verb meddling

to involve oneself in a matter without right or invitation; interfere officiously and unwantedly

Consider encouraging the disclosure of any involvement of AI technology in posts

I'm unsure about this, because I don't know which one is more tiring for elected moderators and other volunteers engaging in quality assurance:

• in lack of encouraged disclosure:
  • having to decide on each and every occassion whether AI was involved in producing the post, or
• with encouraged disclosure:
  • having to worry that someone, despite the COC-prescribed preference, is not being honest about the involvement of the AI.

Re-evaluate as necessary

noun impostor

a person who practices deception under an assumed character, identity, or name

"British Dictionary definitions for impostor":

a person who deceives others, esp by assuming a false identity; charlatan

noun charlatan

a person who pretends or claims to have more knowledge or skill than he or she possesses; quack.

Demand disclosure of origin for AI-generated posts

(Updated content)

As I have learned in the meanwhile, it is a general policy of StackExchange to demand disclosure of such material:

If it wasn't created by you, attribution is always required here.

Rely on community-delegated moderation

verb meddling
to involve oneself in a matter without right or invitation; interfere officiously and unwantedly

Re-evaluate as necessary

noun impostor
a person who practices deception under an assumed character, identity, or name

"British Dictionary definitions for impostor":

a person who deceives others, esp by assuming a false identity; charlatan

noun charlatan
a person who pretends or claims to have more knowledge or skill than he or she possesses; quack.

I'd like to point out that the above is not analogous enough to the contemporary machine learning practice of trial and error, because trial and error —it seems to me— has the implicit step of the verification  / evaluation of results. That's fundamentally missing from ChatGPT's capabilities.

I'd like to point out that the above is not analogous to the contemporary machine-learning practice of trial and error, because trial and error — it seems to me — implicitly involves the verification/evaluation of the results, and the iterative development of the conclusion. That's fundamentally missing from ChatGPT's capabilities.

I admit that I feel both "charlatan" and "impostor" are strong words, and carry heavy emotional weight on top of the intended correct semantical identification of the behaviors in question. Also, introducing them as-is could carry the risk of detrimentally impacting the community's culture. So much so that I imagine they would never ever be accepted by the Ubuntu styleguide.

I admit that I feel both "charlatan" and "impostor" are strong words, and carry heavy emotional weight on top of the intended correct semantical identification of the behaviors in question. Also, introducing them as-is could carry the risk of detrimentally impacting the community culture.