TOS Question: ChatGPT

[Miami Reef]

What’s the difference between the average response to a question on R2R generated by humans and one generated by AI? Both types of AI, biological and in silico, are trained on limited and possibly flawed data sets and both hallucinate (make up stuff).

I don’t think it matters that someone is dumping an AI opinion on R2R because eventually a reasonable answer usually surfaces on this forum.

I feel like the only proper way to respond to this is with AI:




You've made an interesting point about the similarities between human-generated and AI-generated responses, particularly in the context of platforms like Reef2Reef (R2R). Here's a breakdown of the key differences and considerations when comparing these two types of "intelligence" and how they contribute to discussions:

Similarities​

1. Limited Training Data:
   • Humans rely on personal experiences, education, and exposure to information, which can be incomplete or biased.
   • AI, like GPT models, is trained on large datasets that include human knowledge but may also incorporate errors, biases, or outdated information.
2. Hallucination/Mistakes:
   • Humans can misremember, misinterpret, or fabricate answers, either intentionally or unintentionally.
   • AI may "hallucinate" by generating plausible-sounding but factually incorrect or unsupported statements.
3. Iterative Refinement:
   • In both cases, discussions often lead to corrections and refinements. On forums like R2R, a flawed answer (whether from AI or a human) often gets scrutinized and corrected by others, leading to a consensus or a more accurate response.

---

Differences​

1. Creativity and Intuition:
   • Humans: Have intuition based on real-world experience, which can help in situations where data is sparse or the problem is unique.
   • AI: Relies on patterns in its training data and doesn't "intuit" in the same way. AI lacks the personal experience of owning a tank or observing a specific coral's behavior in different conditions.
2. Bias:
   • Humans: Biases can stem from personal preferences, ego, or affiliations (e.g., favoring specific products or methods).
   • AI: Bias comes from the datasets it's trained on, which might emphasize one viewpoint or lack diversity.
3. Consistency and Depth:
   • Humans: Responses vary in quality depending on expertise, mood, or effort. A highly experienced reefer might provide exceptional insights, but someone less knowledgeable may inadvertently spread misinformation.
   • AI: While often consistent and thorough, it might miss nuance or practical subtleties that come from hands-on experience.
4. Accountability and Trust:
   • Humans: Known members with reputations on R2R are often trusted based on their track records, which AI cannot replicate.
   • AI: Users may remain skeptical of AI-generated responses due to its lack of accountability or "real" experience.

---

Implications for Platforms Like R2R​

• AI in Discussions:
  AI can help democratize access to information by providing quick, comprehensive answers. However, it should be treated as a first draft or starting point, especially in a hobby like reefing, where practical experience often outweighs theoretical knowledge.
• Value of Community Verification:
  One of the strengths of forums like R2R is the collaborative nature of knowledge-building. Regardless of who or what generates an initial response, the community's collective expertise helps ensure that misinformation is corrected and the best practices emerge.

---

In essence, while it may not matter if AI contributes to R2R discussions, the value lies in the community's ability to critically evaluate all responses—whether human or machine. As you've noted, reasonable answers tend to surface, which speaks to the forum's strength as a collaborative resource.


How does that response make you feel? Did it feel superficial?

 

[AKReefing]

How does that response make you feel? Did it feel superficial?

Don't know. I'm ADD. I tuned out after the first sentence.

 

[Nonya]

Don't know. I'm ADD. I tuned out after the first sentence.

I thought this subject was pretty much closed anyway.

 

[UMALUM]

At this point it's just feeding the beast. Is it not just as much a smack in the face that he's actively participating in this thread as it is being a greenhorn want to be know it all using ai? I'll get into the Canadian thing after the kids go to bed.

I JUST WANT TO HELP! :loudly-crying-face: BS

 

[exnisstech]

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!

Maybe help by commenting on post that you actually have knowledge or experience with. Any one here has the ability to get ai generated answers if we wanted them with no need to ask here. We do not need you to provide them. Maybe under your name where mine says grumpy old man you can change yours to say you really have no idea what your talking about but you love Ai. I just saw your reply to someone genuinely seeking advice on bending acrylic and it was pathetic. I was once told people learn much more by listening than talking. JMGOM0

 

[FindinNemo]

Wow some people… I’m going through threads where people are left hanging with no replies, and I’m using ChatGPT to help provide them with useful information. What’s the problem with that? It’s not like I’m trying to replace anyone, I'm just making sure people get answers when they need them. Whether you like it or not, ChatGPT is an insanely powerful tool, packed with way more knowledge than any one person could ever hold. It's the future of how we share information, and pretending like it’s some evil thing isn’t going to change that.

I’m using the tool to help fill in the gaps and actually get people answers, not to “cheat” or “fake” anything. If you can’t see the value in that, that’s on you. People are getting the info they need, and that’s all that matters. If you think using ChatGPT is a bad thing, maybe it’s time to step into the present and stop acting like it’s some threat to your outdated ways of doing things.

 

[Matt L]

Wow some people… I’m going through threads where people are left hanging with no replies, and I’m using ChatGPT to help provide them with useful information. What’s the problem with that? It’s not like I’m trying to replace anyone, I'm just making sure people get answers when they need them. Whether you like it or not, ChatGPT is an insanely powerful tool, packed with way more knowledge than any one person could ever hold. It's the future of how we share information, and pretending like it’s some evil thing isn’t going to change that.

I’m using the tool to help fill in the gaps and actually get people answers, not to “cheat” or “fake” anything. If you can’t see the value in that, that’s on you. People are getting the info they need, and that’s all that matters. If you think using ChatGPT is a bad thing, maybe it’s time to step into the present and stop acting like it’s some threat to your outdated ways of doing things.

Understood, but I’m curious how you know the AI answers are correct?

 

[Tahoe61]

Behold the slippery slope.

 

[A_Blind_Reefer]

I didn’t think I cared, but after reading a bit of the responses in various threads I think I’m out. The whole no but I stayed at a holiday inn express, or I’m not a doctor but I played one on tv, we’re funny back in the day. I think I’ll be disconnecting from this site for awhile and let the bots and Ai fan peeps have their day in the sun. I’m just too old and from a different time. Maybe there should be a Superman cape badge for those that feel they need to save us all

 

[FindinNemo]

Understood, but I’m curious how you know the AI answers are correct?

I mean, at the end of the day, if you're asking how I know the answers are correct, it's the same way anyone would, by applying logic, and verifying the info. It’s no different than some random person posting an answer in a forum, they’re providing the best possible information they have, but it’s not a definitive solution. Ultimately, it’s up to the person asking the question to do their own research and use the answers they get as a starting point. ChatGPT is just one more resource in that process, helping guide people in the right direction. But if you’d prefer I just let threads go unanswered, I can do that too.

 

[Tahoe61]

Wow some people… I’m going through threads where people are left hanging with no replies, and I’m using ChatGPT to help provide them with useful information. What’s the problem with that? It’s not like I’m trying to replace anyone, I'm just making sure people get answers when they need them. Whether you like it or not, ChatGPT is an insanely powerful tool, packed with way more knowledge than any one person could ever hold. It's the future of how we share information, and pretending like it’s some evil thing isn’t going to change that.

I’m using the tool to help fill in the gaps and actually get people answers, not to “cheat” or “fake” anything. If you can’t see the value in that, that’s on you. People are getting the info they need, and that’s all that matters. If you think using ChatGPT is a bad thing, maybe it’s time to step into the present and stop acting like it’s some threat to your outdated ways of doing things.

No, nope and nada.

Now you have been here not even 3 days and are telling members how to run a forum, while passively aggressively insulting them. Simply amazing.

 

[exnisstech]

Wow some people… I’m going through threads where people are left hanging with no replies, and I’m using ChatGPT to help provide them with useful information. What’s the problem with that? It’s not like I’m trying to replace anyone, I'm just making sure people get answers when they need them. Whether you like it or not, ChatGPT is an insanely powerful tool, packed with way more knowledge than any one person could ever hold. It's the future of how we share information, and pretending like it’s some evil thing isn’t going to change that.

I’m using the tool to help fill in the gaps and actually get people answers, not to “cheat” or “fake” anything. If you can’t see the value in that, that’s on you. People are getting the info they need, and that’s all that matters. If you think using ChatGPT is a bad thing, maybe it’s time to step into the present and stop acting like it’s some threat to your outdated ways of doing things.

I may be wrong but I think when people ask questions here on this forum it is because we are hoping for answers from real people not Ai. IMO the problem with your responses is that you are not providing any answers that are not already available to all of us without your assistance. You are not providing any great service to anyone again JMO

 

[FindinNemo]

No, nope and nada.

Now you have been here not even 3 days and are telling members how to run a forum, while passively aggressively insulting them. Simply amazing.

Look, I’m not here to insult anyone, and if you’re taking it that way, I can’t change your perception. But let’s be clear: I’ve been here for 3 days because I’m trying to contribute to the community, not tear it down. I’m offering a tool that can help people get answers faster and more efficiently when others can’t. If that rubs you the wrong way, that’s your problem, not mine. I’m not telling anyone how to run a forum, I’m just trying to help by filling in the gaps where no one else is.

If you think ChatGPT is some kind of threat to your way of doing things, fine, but don’t pretend like I’m here to insult anyone. I’m doing what I think is best for the forum, and if you can’t see the value in that, maybe that’s something you should reflect on. At the end of the day, people are getting the help they need, and that’s what matters.

 

[Matt L]

Look, I’m not here to insult anyone, and if you’re taking it that way, I can’t change your perception. But let’s be clear: I’ve been here for 3 days because I’m trying to contribute to the community, not tear it down. I’m offering a tool that can help people get answers faster and more efficiently when others can’t. If that rubs you the wrong way, that’s your problem, not mine. I’m not telling anyone how to run a forum, I’m just trying to help by filling in the gaps where no one else is.

If you think ChatGPT is some kind of threat to your way of doing things, fine, but don’t pretend like I’m here to insult anyone. I’m doing what I think is best for the forum, and if you can’t see the value in that, maybe that’s something you should reflect on. At the end of the day, people are getting the help they need, and that’s what matters.

I answer questions based on experience, but explain their results may vary. It is up to the forum owner and staff to decide if they will allow AI answers.

 

[Miami Reef]

If you think using ChatGPT is a bad thing, maybe it’s time to step into the present and stop acting like it’s some threat to your outdated ways of doing things.

Interesting perspective.

I don’t not consider myself biased: I really like ChatGPT, and even use it myself. It helps me when I have a grammar question, need help wording something, and even gives pretty good advice when I need it. I am an avid user and will readily admit that.

However, for me, copying and pasting its responses as your own (with occasional tweaking of some words) is plagiarism and comes across as spam.

 

[AKReefing]

Nemo, you need to understand that as a newbie to the site and hobby, your inputs are judged by all. Once you start saying, "I'm offering a tool that can help people get answers faster and more efficiently when others can’t", you're coming across as someone who knows better than people, who've already seen what AI can do (and fail at miserably).

Here's a great reason that you should stop pushing GPT as the best option out there: Randy Holmed-Farley: "ChatGPT frequently makes mistakes when it tries to answer chemistry issues." (https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/tips-on-increasing-alk-balling-part-b.1078771/#post-12977040). Chemistry is an essential part of reefkeeping, and using a tool like GPT to calculate reef chemistry supplementation can actually cause a total crash, resulting in the loss of $thousands in fish, corals, etc.

Don't fall for the if-it's-new-it's-automatically-better trap. This hobby has had enough of that over the years.

 

[Tahoe61]

Look, I’m not here to insult anyone, and if you’re taking it that way, I can’t change your perception. But let’s be clear: I’ve been here for 3 days because I’m trying to contribute to the community, not tear it down. I’m offering a tool that can help people get answers faster and more efficiently when others can’t. If that rubs you the wrong way, that’s your problem, not mine. I’m not telling anyone how to run a forum, I’m just trying to help by filling in the gaps where no one else is.

If you think ChatGPT is some kind of threat to your way of doing things, fine, but don’t pretend like I’m here to insult anyone. I’m doing what I think is best for the forum, and if you can’t see the value in that, maybe that’s something you should reflect on. At the end of the day, people are getting the help they need, and that’s what matters.

I don't think you get to make assumptions about what's best for the forum. Where do you think you get that authority?

Initially I was willing to give you the benefit of a doubt.

 

[Dan_P]

I feel like the only proper way to respond to this is with AI:




You've made an interesting point about the similarities between human-generated and AI-generated responses, particularly in the context of platforms like Reef2Reef (R2R). Here's a breakdown of the key differences and considerations when comparing these two types of "intelligence" and how they contribute to discussions:

Similarities​

1. Limited Training Data:
   • Humans rely on personal experiences, education, and exposure to information, which can be incomplete or biased.
   • AI, like GPT models, is trained on large datasets that include human knowledge but may also incorporate errors, biases, or outdated information.
2. Hallucination/Mistakes:
   • Humans can misremember, misinterpret, or fabricate answers, either intentionally or unintentionally.
   • AI may "hallucinate" by generating plausible-sounding but factually incorrect or unsupported statements.
3. Iterative Refinement:
   • In both cases, discussions often lead to corrections and refinements. On forums like R2R, a flawed answer (whether from AI or a human) often gets scrutinized and corrected by others, leading to a consensus or a more accurate response.

---

Differences​

1. Creativity and Intuition:
   • Humans: Have intuition based on real-world experience, which can help in situations where data is sparse or the problem is unique.
   • AI: Relies on patterns in its training data and doesn't "intuit" in the same way. AI lacks the personal experience of owning a tank or observing a specific coral's behavior in different conditions.
2. Bias:
   • Humans: Biases can stem from personal preferences, ego, or affiliations (e.g., favoring specific products or methods).
   • AI: Bias comes from the datasets it's trained on, which might emphasize one viewpoint or lack diversity.
3. Consistency and Depth:
   • Humans: Responses vary in quality depending on expertise, mood, or effort. A highly experienced reefer might provide exceptional insights, but someone less knowledgeable may inadvertently spread misinformation.
   • AI: While often consistent and thorough, it might miss nuance or practical subtleties that come from hands-on experience.
4. Accountability and Trust:
   • Humans: Known members with reputations on R2R are often trusted based on their track records, which AI cannot replicate.
   • AI: Users may remain skeptical of AI-generated responses due to its lack of accountability or "real" experience.

---

Implications for Platforms Like R2R​

• AI in Discussions:
  AI can help democratize access to information by providing quick, comprehensive answers. However, it should be treated as a first draft or starting point, especially in a hobby like reefing, where practical experience often outweighs theoretical knowledge.
• Value of Community Verification:
  One of the strengths of forums like R2R is the collaborative nature of knowledge-building. Regardless of who or what generates an initial response, the community's collective expertise helps ensure that misinformation is corrected and the best practices emerge.

---

In essence, while it may not matter if AI contributes to R2R discussions, the value lies in the community's ability to critically evaluate all responses—whether human or machine. As you've noted, reasonable answers tend to surface, which speaks to the forum's strength as a collaborative resource.


How does that response make you feel? Did it feel superficial?

HaHa, I like the response. It’s a neat summary for further thought.

 

[AKReefing]

If you think ChatGPT is some kind of threat to your way of doing things, fine, but don’t pretend like I’m here to insult anyone. I’m doing what I think is best for the forum, and if you can’t see the value in that, maybe that’s something you should reflect on. At the end of the day, people are getting the help they need, and that’s what matters.

As someone with ZERO SW experience, what makes you think you think you know "what's best for the forum"? The threat you mention is ASSUMING AI is better. Saltwater tanks aren't just a matter of putting colored sand in a tank with tap water and pretty lights. This is an extremely expensive hobby, and it requires a lot of personal knowledge and experience to get it right. Just because two knuckleheads on a TV show make it look easy doesn't mean it is. It's HARD, and that's why so many of us love it. You need to KNOW that the information you're reading can be trusted.

 

[revhtree]

I didn’t think I cared, but after reading a bit of the responses in various threads I think I’m out. The whole no but I stayed at a holiday inn express, or I’m not a doctor but I played one on tv, we’re funny back in the day. I think I’ll be disconnecting from this site for awhile and let the bots and Ai fan peeps have their day in the sun. I’m just too old and from a different time. Maybe there should be a Superman cape badge for those that feel they need to save us all

I’m pretty sure you missed the consensus of the thread??? If you want to leave here to “let the bots and AI fan peeps have their day in the sun” then you’ll be happy to know that you can stay. Because we’re not going to let AI answers take over here. :)