Nostr Web Client

uncomfortable truth? : i feel like the debate on the mailing list about AI authorship for BIPs is reminiscent of the filtering debate for Bitcoin. In both cases, people arguing for prevention (not just dissuasion) are essentially pissing in the wind. Using "automated tools to detect AI usage in documents" is doomed to fail over time, with terrible false +ve rates; just think about it. In both cases, the technological reality just does not support the prevention argument.

As for dissuasion, even that's problematic. It's hard to argue these tools are not useful, and the nuance of "don't misuse it" is too difficult to capture imo. In short, just like spam on-chain, I'm not saying there isn't a problem, but it's hard to define and the cure is worse than the disease.

fiatjaf 1mo ago

People need a way to filter out stuff, because seriously considering every crazy idea ever thought by anyone isn't a feasible option.

Before, the act of writing a BIP was proof-of-work enough to pass the filter and be worth reading by someone else, now that isn't true anymore, so new filters have to be found. For now, just filtering on what is written by AI or not is not great but I can't think of anything better.

Disclaimer: I have no idea of how the work on BIPs is done or what is the latest drama.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

waxwing 1mo ago

Filtering is inevitable. I fear having a fixed rule about how to filter (such as an AI filtering tool) may not be helpful. It's certainly no that clear-cut, though.