I skimmed this criticism of Pokimane and got to the fourth paragraph before I realized I was reading a chatGPT output. The emdashes are the most obvious giveaway, but the constant restatements and trouble with building conclusions are also clear tells, if a little more subtle.
In this case I agree overall with the post, but GPT (or grok - they all write the same) argued the point for the poster and did a mediocre job overall, especially for a post with 3M views. More troubling is that the guy insists he wrote the whole thing himself, which has apparently fooled thousands of people. He's far from the only one, either. It's not uncommon to see people using AI to respond to an argument.
I don't know where this is going. AI is a powerful force multiplier, but if more and more people outsource their writing to it, we will eventually get to a soft version of dead internet theory where real people are volleying back and forth with GPT responses but don't fully understand what they're saying to each other. Scammers and grifters will almost be indistinguishable, superficially. I'm surprised the Indian contingent hasn't figured out how to use GPT outputs en masse, but I'm sure it's coming.
The only hope is that people will develop enough AI literacy to recognize automated content. We'll see if this happens.
Starting to?
Ok I think you are not talking about spam and bot posts but real people actually copy pasting a response from chatgpt instead of thinking and typing their own. Yeah that's kind of the brave new world we entered. What's worse though is professionals doing it. Im pretty sure at least one of the women on the supreme court writes her decisions that way. This is all leading us to The Borg where nobody thinks independently they only repeat the collective will.
You don't think they are? Indians were the first to create fake websites for SEO with gpt. The only difference between them and us is they see a correctly written English response and go 'no no that must be wrong, it doesn't say Please Kindly Do The Needful' so they edit it manually.
That would be Jumanji. She writes her opinions with ChatGPT. I don't think she can actually read. Her dissent in Dobbs rambles about ostriches a couple times, so on top of using a chatbot to write it she didn't proofread it either. So presumably her clerks can't read either.
Their clerks have been writing their opinions for them for decades, and it's not even a secret.
This is normal, but usually clerks are chosen based on how much their thinking matches the relevant Justice. I do distinctly recall a point a few years before she died, when Ginsburg's supposed opinions sounded like they came right out of Sotomayor's office. Ginsburg had been dead on the bench for years to the point and I assume she wasn't selecting her own clerks (because they sounded like Sotomayor), much less reviewing their work. It must have been an open secret because the reasoning and stylistic choices were starkly not Ginsburg's.
With caveats. ACB clerked for Scalia and it’s beyond clear she never wrote anything for him that wasn’t heavily dictated by him. Ones like justice Diabetus, Kagan, and the new one clearly don’t write or dictate their own because their own questioning and speech patterns in the court documents are far removed from their “opinions”.
Oh boy.
The more sophisticated grifters obviously use GPT to write listicles, but I'm talking about the Indians doing low level scamming of the X payout system. There is a whole horde of them spamming posts like "paper or plastic" and boosting each other's engagement to make X money. If these guys figure out they can just use GPT to write takes on trending topics, we are going to get flooded beyond our imagination.