News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Research shows we can only accurately identify AI writers... by robocat on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @03:21PM (#35265901)
Counterpoint: I think our writing in general has vastly improved, but because it happens slowly we don’t notice the absolute difference. I have two examples of middle aged friends who have changed drastically after 2000. One dyslexic friend got a job at 30 where they had to email professionally, and their writing improved a lot (not just spelling, but metaphors etcetera). Another was functionally illiterate (got others to read), but they needed to read and write for work, and they learnt to do the basics (I can send a text and get a reply).

Most jobs now require writing, and most people when doing anything will learn to do it better over time.

Re:Research shows we can only accurately identify AI writers... by ineedasername on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @08:55PM (#35269226)
>I have two examples of middle aged friends who have changed

Yes. My experience teaching college courses gives me wider & more systematic knowledge on college freshmen in particular, but more anecdotally I see people who never quite learn how to organize their ideas effectively in a written form during college. If they get there, they gain it over time in their professional careers by example & through absorbing the cultural norms of communicating in their professional sphere.

And this ability is the foundation of persuasive communication, written or verbal.

That is particularly problematic because persuasive ability is so important in day to day life, career, personal relationships, etc. You need to persuade people to give you a job[1]. You need to persuade colleagues to listen to & adopt your ideas or suggestions when they differ from the established path, or to initially establish a path to begin with. You need to persuade potential dating partners to date you (which may just be a dating profile) and then to continue dating you (which is much more complex than a profile and is perhaps more tied to personality than persuasive ability. Persuasion is required in nearly all aspects of life. I frequently have to persuade people to make decisions that are better in the long term but less appealing in the short term, (and sometimes vice versa) and the nature of my work is to do so with solid data & analysis. (And I'm not always successful even when they agree my data is accurate & reasoning is sound!). People just don't make decisions by following the results of formal logical expressions like p ~

[1] less so than previously maybe?? As an initial first-pass these days you need to game the AI screening tool to put you through to an actual human review

Re:Research shows we can only accurately identify AI writers... by ineedasername on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @09:07PM (#35269300)
>I have two examples of middle aged friends who have changed

Yes. My experience teaching college courses gives me wider & more systematic knowledge on college freshmen in particular, but on a much more anecdotal basis I see people who never quite learn how to organize their ideas effectively in a written form during college. If they get there, they gain it over time in their professional careers by example & through absorbing the cultural norms of communicating in their professional sphere.

And this ability is the foundation of persuasive communication, written or verbal.

That is particularly problematic because persuasive ability is so important in day to day life, career, personal relationships, etc. You need to persuade people to give you a job[1]. You need to persuade colleagues to listen to & adopt your ideas or suggestions when they differ from the established path, or to initially establish a path to begin with. You need to persuade potential dating partners to date you (which may just be a dating profile) and then to continue dating you (which is much more complex than a profile and is perhaps more tied to personality than persuasive ability. Persuasion is required in nearly all aspects of life. I frequently have to persuade people to make decisions that are better in the long term but less appealing in the short term, (and sometimes vice versa) and the nature of my work is to do so with solid data & analysis. (And I'm not always successful even when they agree my data is accurate & reasoning is sound!). People just don't make decisions by following the results of formal logical expressions like p -> q && ¬r. Often not even through lack of understanding logic but because IRL situations are often a lot messier than that:

I lost a "battle" once-- rightfully so! -- even though I demonstrated a course of action that had better long term economic outcomes. This was fully understood & acknowledged but the issue in question might have relevance on risk and uncertainty of bond credit ratings that resulted in a judgement call that short term risks in a worst case scenario would be worse than missing out on the benefits of taking a more long term view. Outcomes were uncertain, my job was to present things based on known data & possible risks, and the job of leadership to make those judgment calls.

[1] less so than previously maybe?? As an initial first-pass these days you need to game the AI screening tool to put you through to an actual human review

Re:Research shows we can only accurately identify AI writers... by autoexec on Wednesday March 22, 2023 @10:14PM (#35269679)
> Counterpoint: I think our writing in general has vastly improved, but because it happens slowly we don’t notice the absolute difference.

Studies show that the majority of Americans can't read or write past a 6th grade level. (https://www.barbarabush.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/BBFou...)

If they got there by improving in their jobs as adults, they must have started out so much worse.