this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2024
265 points (95.5% liked)

Technology

59390 readers
2840 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
265
OpenAI has built a text watermarking method to detect chatgpt written content (www.tomshardware.com)
submitted 3 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
69 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Am I missing something? The article seems to suggest it works via hidden text characters. Has OpenAI never heard of pasting text into a utf8 notepad before?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 97 points 3 months ago (14 children)

The arstechnica article speculated it was more of a pattern of words thing.

I think it is lies, and doesn't exist or work anywhere near as good as they claim. Or, its incredibly easy to bypass.

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2024/08/openai-has-the-tech-to-watermark-chatgpt-text-it-just-wont-release-it/

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 months ago (6 children)

I think it exists and works but that its simply not in their best interest to have people use it and be found out that they used chatgpt, for OpenAI's business/profit potential. I have nothing to back it up but have just lost all faith in OpenAI.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Im willing to believe it exists, but not that its any good. 99% is a crazy accuracy claim.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I van totally believe that it detects AI generated content 99% of the time, that’s trivial. What I really wanna know is the false positive rate. If I write a program that flags everything, it’d have a 100% hit rate. It’d also however have a crazy high false positive rate.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Yup, noticable that they use the phrase "99.9% effective". Effective doesnt have a defined meaning in this contect, unlike accuracy, sensitivity or specificity, so that smells of missleading PR speak to me.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Especially if the claim that it's undetectable by humans.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)