Forum: Story Discussion and Feedback

I agree on the difficulty finding stories to engage me lately. I am hoping that its just a lag while some the better authors work on new postings.

Typing a random location, item or idea into the search bar will often turn up unexpected gems. Quite often I've tried to fill a lost story request by searching a relevant line, only to spend the next two hours reading a different story.

Of course he doesn't have anything to back it up, he's just making noise because his bridge is lonely.

Your first example was likely made with Suno. You can see another example here: https://suno.com/hook/8c5f39fb-a96a-4a5d-9433-40075a273615

This is making the rounds on X right now. We're steps away from genAI being indistinguishable from real life.

https://x.com/MAGACult2/status/2008922663000142282

I was really hoping that was going to be a link to the Irish version of Me Mum Died in the Holly.

You do realize that you can split these ~500 token outputs to get smaller chapters, and you can paste multiple chapters into one file to get a longer file.

Plus that seems only for the simplistic workflow of generating stuff with a trivial chatbot, not using more complex tools.

You heard the concept of false positives?

Curious are you willing to tell what you use for as a predictor function for "AI generated"?

Curious are you willing to tell what you use for as a predictor function for "AI generated"?

I hope he doesn't - otherwise people will adjust the AI output to hide. See, for example, earlier threads where spaces around m-dashes was discussed. If people want to send predictors to Lazeez, it should be direct, not via a forum post!

Ah, I wondered, only because I blundered today about an author (who has been here for more than a decade) complaining about his style suddenly triggering false-positives.

And as far as I know the problem of deciding if something is AI written is scientifically not solved, nor completely solvable.

At best you can get a probability score, cynically, that's "AI", if you want, it's probably a ML model that is used to spit out that probability when presented with the input tokens.

Purely philosophically, and from a system design point, it's always a question how this embedded in the whole system and processes.

E.g. take "AIgenerated?" in the context of education.
Checking homework/theses for AI output can be handled in two different ways:

- if AI content is detected, you kick out the student. (okay, perhaps hyperbole, but that's the bad way)

- if AI content is detected, you quietly add the student and the work to the "random" intense oral examination heap. If the student did the work, oral exam will in most cases be no real hardship. If the student basically copied the solution from "fellow student Mr. AI", generally that will show in an exam interrogation.

As I've been preaching for some time now (that AI study course makes one think about these stuff), it's always about the complete system. The same LLM can work quite differently depending upon the "business processes", the software that drives it, the prompts, and other subtle details.

Last but not least, if somebody wants to figure out what predictor Lazeez is using, it's probably a short exercise:
- he mentioned it costs to use it, so that suggests he uses a 3rd party one. Probably not something that he can run locally. Probably also not something that he self-hosts in a cloud, although that's a possibility.

- so you take a sample of say 30 stories, 15 labelled AI, 15 not labelled so, on the shorter perhaps, take a short market overview what AI text predictors are available for Canadian companies, and run these 30 stories through these predictors.

- my data scientist side suggests that you will probably have either a more or less clear favorite for the predictor he uses, OR you'll discover that there is a number of predictors that perform very similar.

- And finally, you can almost certainly, even with the download limits, get a big enough training set from SO directly to train a predictor yourself.

- if AI content is detected, you kick out the student. (okay, perhaps hyperbole, but that's the bad way)

- if AI content is detected, you quietly add the student and the work to the "random" intense oral examination heap. If the student did the work, oral exam will in most cases be no real hardship. If the student basically copied the solution from "fellow student Mr. AI", generally that will show in an exam interrogation.

Both of these "solutions" are problematic at the K-12 level. And yes, there are K-12 teachers in the US complaining about students using AI to do homework.

The first is impossible for any public school. Government schools can't expel students.

The second is impractical. K-12 schools are not set up to conduct routine oral examinations.

I remember reading about a Masters or Phd candidate who was expelled when a professor recognized copying from his own thesis done years back at a different university. The student later admitted that he took some of the thesis from AI as "research." The AI had obviously been fed the professor's thesis. The stated reason for expulsion was, presenting someone else's work as his own.

a Masters or Phd candidate

Yes, at a university. That has less than nothing to do with my comment which was about the impracticality of the proposed solutions at the K-12 (grade school and high school) level.

I don't advocate expelling students, that was given as an example of stupid, bad policy.

And if they are not set up to verify the competence of pupils one on one, then you have an issue with your education system.

I completely understand that this would be expensive and work intensive. Oops.

But then I can compare here in Europe the university of my youth in the 1990s, where for my technical degree practically all exams were "bring whatever you can carry yourself into the lecture hall" open book, and required true understanding of the subject matter.

And then we switched to the bachelor/master system, university suddenly got much less money, the 5 year master-level degree was turned into 8 different specialized bachelors and 4 follow up masters, the catalogue of >100 specialization classes was cut by 50% and turned into mandatory classes in one of the new study courses and electives in the others.

And of course because the number of TAs was curtailed, the exams turned from open book, understanding based to multiple choice, simplified checking if you have looked at the lecture notes.

Funny thing, I'm doing another technical/mathematical study course now that I'm a bit older, and the experience is totally different.

The real odd thing is, that for many classes going through the slides (not lecture notes) 1-2 days before the "exam" is enough to get a passable grade nowadays (at least for me), which is sad, considering that it's still a hard study course with ~80% dropout rate.

So yes, the issue is if your education is set up for "mass production" without the teacher being able to know their pupils, you have a problem, because then the pupils can get away with submitting the output of others (even the output of a LLM in some cases) as their own.

That's actually why in my country our "mandatory schools" (the ones where everyone has to go to, basically the weaker pupils) tend to be set up to have 2 teachers in parallel for languages and math, interestingly the "better" schools in the track for going to university (which can select their pupils, and also eject them) don't have such luxuries, they are harsher.

The pain people are willing to accept.

Chat interfaces (like chatgpt) are absolutely, IMHO unusable for creating/editing/improving things.

But listening here, that seems to be the common modus operandi.

Chat interfaces (like chatgpt) are absolutely, IMHO unusable for creating/editing/improving things.

But listening here, that seems to be the common modus operandi.

I agree with you, general purpose chatbots are unusable for this.
There are purpose built story writing AI engines out there.
I haven't posted anything AI generated yet, but I've been playing around with one (https://novelai.net). The problem people will run into with these is that they aren't free to use.

I hope that's to pay royalties to the authors whose in-copyright works they used for training ;-)

You have got to be kidding. You know it is only to enrich the AI companies.

Well, I personally am interested in creating the tools, and as it happens I do have the hardware at home to run relatively big LLM.

And some of the online gambling sports books are being run with AI's.

And some of the online gambling sports books are being run with AI's.

A lot depends on what they are using AI for.

A lot depends on what they are using AI for.

I wonder what the score was between West Ham and Maccabi Tel Aviv :-)

AJ

From Facebook's Meta AI this morning:

"The Duke Blue Devils lost to the Indiana Hoosiers in the CFP National Championship game with a score of 27-21. However, I suspect you're referring to their recent games. Here are some recent results ¹:
- _Duke Blue Devils vs. Indiana Hoosiers_: The Hoosiers won 27-21 in the CFP National Championship game on January 19, 2026."

That AI summary might lead you to think that Indiana beat Duke in 2026, but the 2026 championship was Indiana vs Miami.

https://www.ncaa.com/live-updates/football/fbs/indiana-defeats-miami-win-college-football-playoff-national-championship-game

I know. I watched the game.
Sad that the bowl committee took the ACC's 3rd place finisher instead of the champion.

"The Duke Blue Devils lost to the Indiana Hoosiers in the CFP National Championship game with a score of 27-21. However, I suspect you're referring to their recent games. Here are some recent results ¹:
- _Duke Blue Devils vs. Indiana Hoosiers_: The Hoosiers won 27-21 in the CFP National Championship game on January 19, 2026."

And that's what a proper AI research agent like perplexity answers, when you paste the above paragraph, and add "Verify these claims for me please, and give a one paragraph summary."

The claims in the quoted text are incorrect. According to multiple authoritative sources, the CFP National Championship game on January 19, 2026, was played between the Indiana Hoosiers and the Miami Hurricanes, not Duke Blue Devils and Indiana. Indiana defeated Miami 27-21 to win their first-ever national championship, completing an undefeated 16-0 season. The game was held at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida, and featured Indiana as the No. 1 seed and Miami as the No. 10 seed. Duke Blue Devils won the ACC Championship in 2025 but did not qualify for the College Football Playoff, finishing their season 9-5 after defeating Arizona State 42-39 in the Sun Bowl on December 31, 2025.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_College_Football_Playoff_National_Championship is given as one of the references as a footnote after the paragraph.

As I'm saying till I'm hoarse, relying for LLM training data for your knowledge is a high-risk proposition, as there is literally no indication if the output is non-sense (aka the so called hallucination) or really a statistical "recall" from training data.

Anybody with basic knowledge (they don't need to study the subject) can tell you.

Fewer (because good tools like these are not as common) can tell you that LLM works quite well for NLP tasks, and surprising well (if not always perfect) for orchestrating tasks.