For images OpenAI has added watermarks to identify AI generated images. But
these watermarks are apparently easy to
remove.https://gizmodo.com/openai-chatgpt-how-to-check-watermark-metadata-c2pa-1851234655For
texts it is harder to recognize if they are AI generated or not unless it is a
regurgitation of a learned text. The lawsuit of the NY Times against OpenAI is
based on 100 examples where AI generated text matches NY Times articles
verbatim word for word.
https://www.vox.com/technology/2024/1/18/24041598/openai-new-york-times-copyright-lawsuit-napster-google-sony-J.
-------- Original message --------From: glen <geprope...@gmail.com> Date:
2/8/24 5:54 PM (GMT+01:00) To: friam@redfish.com Subject: [FRIAM] provenance
She Was Falsely Accused of Cheating With AI — And She Won’t Be the
Lasthttps://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/student-accused-ai-cheating-turnitin-1234747351/That
is an old article. But what interests me is: "Then she began gathering
evidence that she’d written the brief herself."It strikes me that the best way
to give evidence that you actually wrote something (or generated any kind of
[cough] content), is to show its evolution from start to finish. For things
like code and text, it seems obvious to simply use a revision control system.
That can include something as irritating as Track Changes in Word, Git, or
whatever. But for blobs, it seems more difficult. Most tools like GIMP have an
Undo function, but only for that session. If you close the project then re-open
it, you can't undo what you did before you closed it. It seems reasonable to
store some sort of trace, even if it's prohibitive to allow for full
reversibility.A second-best way might be to keep either all your old content so
you can extract patterns from it and, then, show how some one instance of it
matches your induced "signature". Or you could throw away or assume old content
will be lost and keep a defeasible inference database, continually trained up
on your content, handy to give such pattern-oriented evidence. But this sort of
diachronic database has the same flaws bemoaned in the article (e.g. TurnItIn's
AI detector). Plus, some of us want to doff such histories once and awhile,
make ourselves anew.But if we were to encourage people of, say, age 10 to store
their works, we'd have to teach them how to index their portfolio. We'd have to
teach library science at a very early age. I can't even find notes I took a
week ago, much less crap I wrote decades ago.-- ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ
ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. ---
-.. .FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservFridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns
Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriamto (un)subscribe
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-COMIC
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/archives: 5/2017 thru present
https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021
http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
