Good luck enforcing it. The problem isn’t attribution however. The AI is trained on patterns. As soon as someone creates their own model, the only way you can tell it might have been generated from AI is because it’s gibberish.
I could absolutely use an AI to help me write a post and you would be unable to prove I did without exerting more effort than it would merit. It’s just a tool. It’s like accusing me of plagiarizing a dictionary because my definition of some word is too similar in content to all the other correct definitions. Knowledge can’t be copyrighted.
Do we not already punish people for repeatedly posting poor quality content? This fear of AI is silly. The problem isn’t the tool, it’s how people use it. There is already a policy against posting nonsense as an answer. Whether that nonsense was computer generated so it looks less like nonsense is irrelevant.
The main point of supporting an answer with citations on SE should be to make it credible, not just to give credit. If I copy text from a website generated by a GPT tool and attribute it correctly, is that OK? It is no different from me pasting generated content and identifying the tool as the writer of it. At some point, we need to address the role people upvoting bad content because it seems like it’s correct play in incentivizing low quality content.
Read More
Christeen Geddes