TOS Question: ChatGPT

[Crabs McJones]

Thank you and I’ve turned the corner although I still have a slight fever.

You're a hot guy, what can we say :rolling-on-the-floor-laughing:

 

[BeanAnimal]

I understand the concerns and value learning from the community’s personal experiences. As a newcomer to saltwater aquariums, I recognize how important real world insights are. I truly appreciate the wealth of knowledge here, and I know it’s something you can’t get from just looking up answers online.

Moving forward, I’ll focus on learning directly from all of you and contributing with my own experiences. I’m grateful to be part of this community and will engage in a way that’s respectful, helpful, and focused on meaningful exchange. Let’s all move on from this and grow!

Given that this response too, feels like it was AI generated or tweaked -- I am going to give you some unsolicited personal advise.

"Moving forward” is about recognizing the impact of your contributions and whether they’re genuinely helpful or just adding noise. If your responses are AI-generated or heavily tweaked by AI, it diminishes the value of what this community is built around and it is important for you to understand that.

Barring extenuating circumstances (such as disability) -- using AI to simply communicate in a voice and grammar that is not your own (your response) is antithetical to the spirit of a community forum like this and most other situations where one is expecting candid human-to-human dialog. Use your own words, not AI polished responses, it is what people expect in a conversation, flaws and all.

AI is a powerful tool, but like any tool, it can be easily (often grossly) misused. I strongly suggest building your grammar and sentence structure by proofreading your own words and learning to express yourself in a clear and concise manner without the help of AI. You will be far better off for it in the long run. Knowledge and communication are work, there are no shortcuts. Using AI as a crutch is not teaching you anything, and in fact the more reliant you become on it, the less practiced and personable you will be.

 

[BeanAnimal]

Thank you and I’ve turned the corner although I still have a slight fever.

Bacon, Rev... bacon (well, and butter) makes everything better.

Yes, one day we will print bacon in our replicators, but the real stuff will always be better.

Go now... have your bacon and feel better.

 

[rtparty]

Gives an AI written apology post about how they won’t use AI any longer…. :thinking-face:

 

[AKReefing]

Given that this response too, feels like it was AI generated or tweaked -- I am going to give you some unsolicited personal advise.

I had the same thought but chose not to mention it. Looks like somebody's on the watchlist. LOL.

Are we being manipulated?

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

@revhtree , please check out nemo's recent posts... seems like he's making them appear less "computer generated" but is still just regurgitating information he did not already have a clue about...

 

[Crabs McJones]

I had the same thought but chose not to mention it. Looks like somebody's on the watchlist. LOL.

Are we being manipulated?

 

[Miami Reef]

I’m glad I made this thread. It seems like a very important issue to discuss, with an update needed to the TOS. It had to be said. :)

Thanks guys for having my back. I’m glad the majority of us agreed that AI responses to posts wasn’t a direction we should be taking.

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

Now, I'm off to Home Depot to find people looking for help; when I have no clue about their questions, I'll use ChatGPT to provide "expert advice". I'm sure it will turn out well!

 

[Crabs McJones]

Now, I'm off to Home Depot to find for people looking for help; when I have no clue about their questions, I'll use ChatGPT to provide "expert advice". I'm sure it will turn out well!

I'll give you credit, at least we can find you. 9/10 when I go to home depot or menards there isn't an employee to be seen for miles

 

[EeyoreIsMySpiritAnimal]

I'll give you credit, at least we can find you. 9/10 when I go to home depot or menards there isn't an employee to be seen for miles

I bet you'll wish you hadn't found me after I'm done, lol!

 

[Crabs McJones]

I bet you'll wish you hadn't found me after I'm done, lol!

I'll take what I can get :rolling-on-the-floor-laughing:

 

[rtparty]

Now, I'm off to Home Depot to find people looking for help; when I have no clue about their questions, I'll use ChatGPT to provide "expert advice". I'm sure it will turn out well!

 

[Johnd651]

I bet you'll wish you hadn't found me after I'm done, lol!

I don't know about you... but around these big box stores, the employees probably shouldn't be giving advice

 

[BeanAnimal]

I don't know about you... but around these big box stores, the employees probably shouldn't be giving advice

Once in a while you get a retired trade member that knows what they are talking about. But like the LFS, grocery store or ice cream parlor… buyer beware and do your own research :)

 

[Johnd651]

Once in a while you get a retired trade member that knows what they are talking about. But like the LFS, grocery store or ice cream parlor… buyer beware and do your own research :)

Woo....ice cream parlor. Where else can you try all the flavors, and get paid to do it. They should be experts... every one of them.

 

[Tahoe61]

I understand the concerns around AI generated content, and I respect the frustrations that can come with it. I believe a practical step for mods would be to make it standard practice to include a message signature such as: 'Some information in this message was sourced from ChatGPT' or something similar. This would help clarify the origin of information and provide transparency for all members. All I am trying to do is help!

This gave me great pause. At this point personally I am beginning to question if an actual individual is driving this.
I am expecting to see other hobbyist forums experience a similar test.
Unfortunately I am confident forums are just beginning to see the challenge.

 

[mizimmer90]

I think there is a genuine use and utility of AI on reef2reef threads. Maybe not in this current implementation, but I like the direction and think @FindinNemo is actually onto something. I think AI responses on threads with no responses are valuable, but can see a criticism that they have a “let me Google that for you” vibe.

The more advanced approach would be to incorporate some of the newer specialty AI agents into reef2reef. The newer agent frameworks are essentially multiple instances of an LLM that communicate with each other and can take on different roles, such as searching through relevant threads, fact checking data, and formulating a response.

Here's a scenario: you want to determine if the redfield ratio is important in your reef tank but you see multiple threads that strongly say different things. An agent will not only search through reef2reef threads and interpret responses, but will also bring in it's general knowledge of chemistry, biology, etc. (In the ML field we call this an emergent property where LLMs can utilize information across disciplines and actually do more than parrot answers) to determine the validity of each thread. It can then summarize each thread and provide an evaluation on their scientific strengths and weaknesses. This would be so valuable to novice reefers who struggle to know what to believe when there are such divergent opinions on this forum.

In summary, while I think blanket chatGPT responses can have their use, better agent frameworks built into the site could be a huge win for us all. I'd actually implore @revhtree to look into this! It's where all modern tech and websites are moving.

 

[BeanAnimal]

I think there is a genuine use and utility of AI on reef2reef threads. Maybe not in this current implementation, but I like the direction and think @FindinNemo is actually onto something. I think AI responses on threads with no responses are valuable, but can see a criticism that they have a “let me Google that for you” vibe.

Respectfully - they are not helpful and almost everything @FindinNemo has posted amounts to pure noise that is more like content mill filler than it is useful help. It is not a vibe, it amounts to forum spam and is worse than "let me google that for you".

The more advanced approach would be to incorporate some of the newer specialty AI agents into reef2reef. The newer agent frameworks are essentially multiple instances of an LLM that communicate with each other and can take on different roles, such as searching through relevant threads, fact checking data, and formulating a response.

Fact checking? LLMs can't fact check, they are mad-libs on steroids and makes up their own sources, math and facts at will. We have enough trouble "fact-checking" each other, let alone an LLM that has been mislead by the lot of us to begin with and presents itself as a "trusted" resource or guide. Thanks, but no thanks.

I use several LLMs for work daily. They are insanely inaccurate, incapable of maintaining simple context and tend to ramble on about everything under the sun, no matter what template or directive is used.

Here's a scenario: you want to determine if the redfield ratio is important in your reef tank but you see multiple threads that strongly say different things.

Does it occur to you that the misleading information posted here to begin with could easily be the result of somebody using AI to appear more informed than they actually are?

An agent will not only search through reef2reef threads and interpret responses, but will also bring in it's general knowledge of chemistry, biology, etc. (In the ML field we call this an emergent property where LLMs can utilize information across disciplines and actually do more than parrot answers) to determine the validity of each thread. It can then summarize each thread and provide an evaluation on their scientific strengths and weaknesses. This would be so valuable to novice reefers who struggle to know what to believe when there are such divergent opinions on this forum.

Respectfully, I am here to interact with PEOPLE and not walls of bloviated, barfed-up content. The moment that something like that is introduced here, IN ANY FORM.. I am 100% out, no questions asked. If that means I am the only one, so be it. I don't care how accurate or relevant the information is. If I want an LLM's response, I will ask an LLM for a response. I don't want to see that crap plastered in every nook and cranny of the planet that I visit, be it the "new way" or not.

 

[mizimmer90]

Respectfully - they are not helpful and almost everything @FindinNemo has posted amounts to pure noise that is more like content mill filler than it is useful help. It is not a vibe, it amounts to forum spam and is worse than "let me google that for you".


Fact checking? LLMs can't fact check, they are mad-libs on steroids and makes up their own sources, math and facts at will. We have enough trouble "fact-checking" each other, let alone an LLM that has been mislead by the lot of us to begin with and presents itself as a "trusted" resource or guide. Thanks, but no thanks.

I use several LLMs for work daily. They are insanely inaccurate, incapable of maintaining simple context and tend to ramble on about everything under the sun, no matter what template or directive is used.


Does it occur to you that the misleading information posted here to begin with could easily be the result of somebody using AI to appear more informed than they actually are?


Respectfully, I am here to interact with PEOPLE and not walls of bloviated, barfed-up content. The moment that something like that is introduced here, IN ANY FORM.. I am 100% out, no questions asked. If that means I am the only one, so be it. I don't care how accurate or relevant the information is. If I want an LLM's response, I will ask an LLM for a response. I don't want to see that crap plastered in every nook and cranny of the planet that I visit, be it the "new way" or not.

I will not defend the current usage of chatGPT but ignoring the value added of AI or LLMs is a mistake.

You claim that LLMs cannot fact check but they are actually really good at this. I also use ML models daily and am continually impressed by their capabilities. You can ask an agent to summarize a paper for you and quote where in the paper each source came from. Even if you don't trust the collective knowledge in an LLM, this is valuable. I.e. don't feel like reading 10 pages of a thread, ask an LLM to summarize what was said.

As with any tool, it's important to know how to use it. One might think a screw driver is a terrible tool because it can't cut through a log. Agents that could assist with interpretation/summarizing/chatting on threads would be a huge win for this site.