Why do people attempt to discourage long well-written answers by instant AI accusations?

Question

I remember a discussion where people were so sure in their ability to detect AI, when SE decided to not allow dealing with potential ChatGPT answers.

What I see in reality, occassionally, is that most people have 0 clue on how to detect AI, apart from the most obvious cases that are 90-100% copy pastes from ChatGPT. Here are some recent cases of nonsensical accusations:

• my longer answer about captchas (accusation got reported and deleted, but downvote and delete vote stayed as of now).

The only suspicious things here are paragraph splits and decent enough English - but it's definitely not even perfect. Otherwise, a lot of phrases and wording are what AI would never use - "1st", "(= ...)", "have/want", etc. There's also some doubt/uncertainty which AI very rarely shows.

Any popular AI detectors gave this 0% rating, so no clue where the idea came from. These tools aren't perfect either ofc, but if they show no relation to AI at all, I don't know what's the point of trying to accuse someone. In that case AI usage is hidden so well that the idea is copied but the post is fully rewritten, which can't ever be proven. Even if contents are incorrect, as the poster could just be wrong himself.

• this answer about ffmpeg and Opus format.

Similarly, it's longer, it has paragraphs, good English and... that's it. It has even more syntaxes and wording that AIs wouldn't go for - unclosed (, "file/stream", quoted frames, "(1)" type of refences in the middle of text, etc. The ratings are yet again 0. No idea what encouraged someone to instantly write a comment about ChatGPT.

The fact that comments can contain basically anything and are only up for mods to remove if you report them doesn't help here. IMO bad comments should be more punishable, but that's another topic.

I'll just end this with a note that you don't just go to a store and accuse people of selling fakes with 0 analysis of the products. That's complete lack of manners and common sense and could actually lead to your arrest and a court case against you for defamation or anything similar. You also can't pick some random books in local library and damage them because you think they're copied. Internet is more free in terms of speech, but shouldn't be more free in terms of vandalism - yes, I think that attempting to discourage good quality answers in a mindless way is exactly that. Think about it.

Answer 1

I get the slightest feeling of something that's turned from trying to keep the site 'neat' into essentially witchcraft trials.

As an end user - if you suspect someone of posting AI answers, there's literally no point in accusing them, or getting into an argument. If you're right, it's someone who clearly cares so little they're copy-pasting machine generated garbage. If you're wrong, you've gotten into an entirely unnecessary argument. It's probably better to focus on factual blunders in the question and flag for attention if you are reasonably sure it's an AI poster.

As to the why? Well, I'd say people are frustrated with AI - as a community-generated knowledge base that's done perfectly fine without AI, and TPTB don't understand 'why' people leave the place. People believe AI is the font of all knowledge when it's basically ... not, and they take its babbling for truth.

Unfortunately, we don't really have the support to deal with the underlying frustration causing these folks to rage - especially considering the 'recent' drama over SE trying to regulate moderation of chatGPT and such posts.

I'd say though, if you're an active user of the site, put down the pitchforks and torches and let us know so we can deal with it. Accusing people of using genAI and being wrong isn't nice. We have better tools - leaving it to the mods rather than arguing over it in comments is a better idea.

Answer 2

The premise of the question in the title makes a very broad assumption regarding intent:

“Why do people attempt to discourage long well-written answers by instant AI accusations?”

Why do you think someone leaving one simple comment that reads, “Is it ChatGPT?” is doing so with the intent to discourage answers; well-written or otherwise?

What impact does one measly, disposable comment have on the large answer? If the answer is valid it gains upvotes and comments are meaningless; this happens regardless of any comments.

“IMO bad comments should be more punishable, but that's another topic.”

Oh, please give me a break. Nobody is leaving comments that suddenly destroy answers. Someone asking “Is it ChatGPT?” like I sometime do, are not out to destroy answers.

I have posted TONS of content here that is well written and thought out but does not read like LLM created content.

The biggest issue with your valid examples shown is that normal humans don’t post intent that reads “In conclusion…” and such.

Some people write essays that are not badly written but are just linguistically ridiculous. Cut down on the purple prose.

“None of this makes any sense to me and as can be seen by my post it leads to less knowledgable people spamming "Is it ChatGPT?" nonsense under many longer answers, which SE exactly wanted to avoid.”

What exactly are you complaining about? One or two lousy comments that ask “Is this ChatGPT?”

Like I said, I often leave such comments but never flag the answer or question unless it is truly awful. The thing that gets me are overwritten answers with headings and filled with purple prose. That is not good writing unless you are in Middle School.

That’s it.

Quit complaining and whining. One lousy comment should not drag down a valid question or answer.

---

PS: And to address this overly dramatic closing or your question

“Internet is more free in terms of speech, but shouldn't be more free in terms of vandalism - yes, I think that attempting to discourage good quality answers in a mindless way is exactly that. Think about it.”

If you are seriously that thin skinned that one lousy comment like “Is this ChatGPT?” is seen as “vandalism” then you should not post anything anywhere.