There's a lot in that piece that's telling, but yes, that's definitely in the top 2.

@tante

Chasing the wrong performance indicator ?

( Watch postgrad thinking skills decline over 3 years, as they master the idiom of the journals )

In general, there is a massive amount of harm being done by normal numbnuts going "this is clearly AI, look at the [random shit]".

Because most of the "telltales" of AI are due not to some "watermark" but to theft.

The AI company stole some people's work, and now those people are being accused of using "AI".

There are at least two artists on here having to deal with that on the regular, and it must be so infuriating and awful and disspiriting.

@danielaKay @tante

> serves to show just how little regard the people behind these generated-text fingerprinting schemes have for the actual craft of writing

I'm not sure it counts as a craft if you outsource it all to a machine

Yes, silly to claim outrage about a non-deterministic thing being non-deterministic in a very slightly different way. It's a bit like giving an output in millimetres to a sum where one of the inputs was "about a mile".

But I feel I must give the writer credit for the phrase "the saccharine Claude personality stink"!

#LLMs

Anyone non-critically linking to independent Fox News dipshit John Gruber is dangerous.

https://beige.party/@Vorsos/115499360647025445

The watermarking is about *how* you choose the next token, not *which* word that ends up being. So the patterns are not something you can recognize or subconsciously learn and repeat.

For a gross oversimplification, imagine you always choose the second most likely candidate exactly eight times in a row, followed by selecting the fourth candidate exactly once, followed by exactly five more second candidates.

As I tried to read that extreme tl;dr I asked myself, if my brain had lost too many synapses by the heatwave.

If the future are such texts, 🥶 I want to retire straight away!