<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>akiselev</author><text>You can tell if it’s vanilla ChatGPT but the second you tell it to write in another style and tone, it changes completely. It’s very interesting that it sounds like a generic high school essay by default, but that’s without any extra instruction.&lt;p&gt;For example, ask it to write in the style of Christopher Hitchens, Charles Bukowski, or Hunter S Thompson, let alone more extreme examples like Shakespeare or Dante</text><parent_chain><item><author>wheybags</author><text>&amp;gt; What exactly makes anyone think that they can detect an LLM that is outputting text?&lt;p&gt;When you read LLM output, you can often tell. The source of the notion is that we can do it pretty well ourselves, so if the AIs are so magical then they should be able to do it too (not saying I agree, but it is a pretty clear line of logic).</text></item><item><author>iinnPP</author><text>If a GPT detector has any false positives at all it will disadvantage people who are already disadvantaged. They are the least likely to be capable of defending themselves and the least likely to be heard if they do try to defend themselves.&lt;p&gt;Not to mention the fact that being called non-human is most definitely going to offend some people.&lt;p&gt;What exactly makes anyone think that they can detect an LLM that is outputting text? The notion seems absurd yet it keeps coming up.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.02819</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>oneTbrain23</author><text>In schools, my coursemates and I always plagiarised each other work. We also heavily do it via any other means like having a class pooled together funds for buying work done by outsiders. This span anything from quantum mechanics to even science fair projects. We ended passing many college course with near flying colors. What have we learnt by cheating? How to cheat better. We learnt how rephrase, rearrange assembly codes, reformat, etc. Some of us even develop program to do substitution and rephrasing. This was way before chatgpt. We did well with this skills as we apply it in corporate world plagiarising collegues works and even competitor a product. We even glorified how Samsung did it in early days of smartphone war era. I am sure my juniors in my high school and college will do the same with chatgpt. I can assure you we plagiarised and got away with it near 100% (unless some were lazy enough not to clean up their copy of plagiarise source material). Those that get caught will just have to learn to adapt. When you graduate from you college, ability to plagiarise is very important in your career (as long as non academia). You can tell if you know the persons tendency of dishonesty. If purely on work output, you are at best at coin toss or maybe those very low quality students. Back my days, we already have plagiarise detectors and even bots to detect plagiarised programming assignments. It is hard to tell. Chatgpt will adapt the output to be non perfect. Plagiariser will also adapt like my experience to de-chatgpt it. It has been done. It will be co tinue to do happen.</text><parent_chain><item><author>wheybags</author><text>&amp;gt; What exactly makes anyone think that they can detect an LLM that is outputting text?&lt;p&gt;When you read LLM output, you can often tell. The source of the notion is that we can do it pretty well ourselves, so if the AIs are so magical then they should be able to do it too (not saying I agree, but it is a pretty clear line of logic).</text></item><item><author>iinnPP</author><text>If a GPT detector has any false positives at all it will disadvantage people who are already disadvantaged. They are the least likely to be capable of defending themselves and the least likely to be heard if they do try to defend themselves.&lt;p&gt;Not to mention the fact that being called non-human is most definitely going to offend some people.&lt;p&gt;What exactly makes anyone think that they can detect an LLM that is outputting text? The notion seems absurd yet it keeps coming up.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>GPT detectors are biased against non-native English writers</title><url>https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.02819</url></story>