Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

marketrent OP t1_j5z05ci wrote

Reply to comment by kilkonie in ChatGPT can’t be credited as an author, says world’s largest academic publisher (26 Jan. 2023) by marketrent

>kilkonie

>That means it's not plagiarism when I use its work as it's not an author. Nice!

Did you read the linked content? From it:

>AI writing software can amplify social biases like sexism and racism and has a tendency to produce “plausible bullshit” — incorrect information presented as fact. (See, for example, CNET’s recent use of AI tools to write articles. The publication later found errors in more than half of those published.)

8

kilkonie t1_j5z1gcf wrote

Of course. As a human that interacts with a limited set of like-minded people, my own writing has the potential to amplify social biases like sexism and racism that aligns to my own bubble of friends. I also have a tendency to produce “plausible bullshit” — incorrect information presented as fact. (See, for example, most of my high school papers.)

My point was that if I can't cite the output of ChatGPT as the actual author of the content, then I simply must take it upon myself to deal with the repercussions of publishing crap work, wherever it came from.

15

sesor33 t1_j5zmzue wrote

Remember, Reddit doesn't read, and it looks like Reddit doesn't want to write either. You literally have people in threads begging for a computer to think FOR them. I say this as someone who works with computers and has worked with ML before.

5

quantumfucker t1_j62vf6i wrote

This has nothing to do with plagiarism though, which is what the comment is talking about.

2