• fluxx@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    10 hours ago

    This won’t work - you can always use a dumber, open model to rephrase and remove the watermark. All this does is marketing for anthropic, which I see most people are buying. Gives you a false impression you will easily be able to figure out if it’s done by AI, which it is not. Liars are still gonna lie, cheaters still gonna cheat.

    • it_depends_man@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      Sure, but they need the watermarking to later claim the copyright on the stuff that people do create in the open with their agents.

      “They would never do that!”

      “And even if they did, I would sue them, and then the justice system would…”

      “uh… uh oh”

      • fluxx@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        My tinfoil head tells me they don’t want to ingest their own slop for training. But this only helps them if others do the same. Data poisoning is a real problem for llm future.

  • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    11 hours ago

    While I can appreciate that it’s not a good thing to let AI do your work for you (not just laziness but hallucinations), I can see this is only going to encourage cheaters to use competitors to Claude.

    Like Deepseek.

    • aim4harmony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      This is probably relative. A lot of people (smarter and not so smart) got hooked on it because of how accessible and convient it is to just ask AI any question and get it spit an answer in seconds. However, there does seem to be a catch - after some time you feel emptiness / void because of how hollow it is. You don’t seem to need to do a research anymore and critically evaluate the options.

  • Zephorah@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    19 hours ago

    It should be watermarked. Credit for answers should go to what generated the answers. If it’s not you, well, now it’s not so easy to be a lying sack of shit.

    • bonesawmcl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Even more! In the EU it has to be marked/identified as AI generated, if you publish it anywhere (not that it’s enforced much yet, but competitors might/will sue if it’s used in a company setting). I think this should be adopted world wide (although fat chance, I know)…

    • shartgargle@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Oh shit, Claude has enough credits to graduate with tens of thousands of degrees from hundreds of universities? All around a C-B average, weird.

  • Blaster M@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Using the ai to help find the answers… ok. Using the ai to provide the answers… not ok. You still have to pull up the references or links it gives you and do the research.

    • andallthat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 hours ago

      except that those links are increasingly pointing to slop content anyway. Even scientific papers.

    • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Using the ai to help find the answers…

      I think this is one of many reasons why search engines became so bad so that using AI could be promoted instead. I have turned to using AI for searching because of it.

      • Taleya@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Absolutely. You use soemthing like startpage or dogpile and it’s night and fucking day to anything that uses google or google services. Yes i include ddg.

      • dil@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I turned to it 2022ish, bingai at the time was the best for finding sources, google was already rough because of promotion and seo shenanigans

    • edwardbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      That’s the issue. It’s someone else’s fault, always. It requires a substantial amount of grey matter to accept personal responsibility, e.g. “I fucked up”. It was me, who made a mistake. When we make a mistake we downgrade to our lowest, most childish behavior, to deceive, lie and cheat, just so we are not in trouble.

      Some people never ever ever ask the question to themselves “Did my actions cause harm to another?”. Their self-importance is too great for that. The maximum I can ever hope for, with the current state of humanity is, they’ll think about it, but throw in a nice excuse. Usually “But I was stressed/busy/angry when I did it”. And that makes it okay.

      So, sadly, it requires a lot of grey matter to not use it. Mainly because of humankind’s inability to accept personal responsibility, not because a clanker contains some unobtainable information.

  • Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    19 hours ago

    i find it funny how some users tried to argue that they did most of the work. it doesnt matter if you did most of the work, everyone as students were supposed to learn to cite your sources. even if you just used claude to reorganize info, theres no reason why you would be against watermarking it unless you wanted to hide the fact you used claude.