"We could identify it because it's shit." - researchers
this post was submitted on 09 Jul 2026
84 points (85.0% liked)
Technology
86249 readers
3166 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Here’s the thing: Read enough AI output and everyone can spot it. And that’s the seam that runs through it. The answer is partly right and it’s important to be honest about it. That’s the load bearing statement. It’s this. But it’s also that. And that’s doing a lot of the work here.
It’s. So. Staccato. And it sounds like tech bro in a Patagonia gilet.
Millions of college students silently scream.
93.2% macro-F1 for human vs. AI detection and 68.4% macro-F1 for six-way authorship attribution
This isn't what I'd call "reliable".
I'm also not impressed with their methodology, which is heavily based on Gemini.
To generate mirrored AI stories, we reverse-engineer writing prompts from each human story by prompting Gemini 2.5 Flash (Gemini Team, 2025a) to infer the underlying premise
That's too many steps removed from anything you'd encounter in the wild. They're not even testing against human-prompted output.
And then they use Gemini again to analyze all the stories. Relying on proprietary cloud models for the core of your analysis is like building on sand.
Next up: AI adapts to evade detection by last week's researchers' detectors.
load more comments
(27 replies)
"On the one hand, this is good news. On the other hand..."
Find me an option that works like GDocs keeping a running history of writing and editing, and I'll consider it.
I have receipts for the integrity of my writing. I dont need some shitty tool to validate it.
You can literally just type what the ai says into Google Docs.
I hate using it to write.
It tracks the edits. If you generate a whole doc in one shot then it's obviously AI.
If you have a shitty draft, then a slightly less shitty draft, then... ... ... Then a quality end product, you can see how the human worked.
AI can't really replicate that.
I only ever wrote first drafts when they were forced upon me in school. There might be some edits, but my first draft is largely what I would submit because I hated to write as a kid and didn't want to write the same thing 3-5 times by hand before submitting it. A small benefit from being around before computers were so common was learning how to write a paragraph ahead in my mind, it would help me catch anything I was about to forget to include, or to remove a trailing thought before I wrote it out.
I hated writing by hand, too.
I had to write more starting in junior high (middle school). This was back in the late 70s. We had an old, non-electric typewriter at home, so, I took typing in seventh grade. For final edit, I'd cut the sheets up and use white out, and then take the taped up mess to a store with a copy machine. That's how I got through high school English classes, too.
Later, when I got into graphic design as a profession, I learned this was common practice, and called "paste up".
That's not how story writing works. Or any long form written art works for that matter. Try to ask any writer if they ever "write in their head" and publish those as a book as-is
The biggest thing I "wrote in my head" was my capstone for my Bachelor's, I managed a 93 and that is more than high enough for me. I'm not an author though so I doubt I could do a book.
I love that docs receipt feature and agree with you. Great call.
Forgive me being well-meaningly obnoxious, but make sure to get receipts outside of the Google ecosystem too. As a professional writer/editor myself, I've heard horror stories about folks losing access to an account, and therefore the receipts.
I am also skeptical of these kinds of tools.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Some moron is gonna vibe code a script that spoofs this on the surface. Yea it'll be detectable, but not detected in most cases.
OpenAI literally has Google connectors to work with your documents. This is meaningless.
I wonder how does this stand to writers who have learnt English as a second language
load more comments
(2 replies)
... which will be fed into the next generation of LLMs in order to stop sounding quite so much like LLMs.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›