Return to Answer

The policy is

Generative artificial intelligence (a.k.a. GPT, LLM, generative AI, genAI) tools may not be used to generate content for Physics Stack Exchange.

If you see it, flag it.

I would like to strongly encourage flaggers to use the "standard flags," which put flagged posts into the review queues, before resorting to custom flags which are seen only by diamond moderators. The appropriate flag is either "very low quality" (for "severe content problems") or "rude or abusive" (for wasting everyone's time and effort). The "rude" flag, if validated by the community, has a stiff reputation penalty and is related to some systems that can restrict the account's ability to create new posts.

I really don't want for the diamond moderators to find ourselves in the position of suspending human users for using em-dashes — such superficial "AI giveaways" have particularly low reliability. The more we can crowdsource the detection, the better our outcome will be.

I had a long paragraph here about how much I dislike failing the Turing Test, but I can't quite make it a productive thing to say in public rather than just a rant.

The policy is

Generative artificial intelligence (a.k.a. GPT, LLM, generative AI, genAI) tools may not be used to generate content for Physics Stack Exchange.

If you see it, flag it.

I would like to strongly encourage flaggers to use the "standard flags," which put flagged posts into the review queues, before resorting to custom flags which are seen only by diamond moderators. The appropriate flag is probably "very low quality" (for "severe content problems"), which puts the post into a review queue which is accessible to users with more than 2000 reputation points. A comment which (politely) reminds the user that chatbot output is not allowed here might help to guide other users working through the VLQ queue.

The flag "rude or abusive" (for wasting everyone's time and effort), may also be appropriate. Posts which have only a "rude" flag don't seem to reach the non-moderator review queues, so this route isn't effective in crowdsourcing our chatbot detection. However, "rude" flags have other consequences. More about flags.

I really don't want for the diamond moderators to find ourselves in the position of suspending human users for using em-dashes — such superficial "AI giveaways" have particularly low reliability. The more we can crowdsource the detection, the better our outcome will be.

I had a long paragraph here about how much I dislike failing the Turing Test, but I can't quite make it a productive thing to say in public rather than just a rant.

The policy is

Generative artificial intelligence (a.k.a. GPT, LLM, generative AI, genAI) tools may not be used to generate content for Physics Stack Exchange.

If you see it, flag it.

I would like to strongly encourage flaggers to use the "standard flags," which put flagged posts into the review queues, before resorting to custom flags which are seen only by diamond moderators. The appropriate flag is either "very low quality" (for "severe content problems") or "rude or abusive" (for wasting everyone's time and effort). The "rude" flag, if validated by the community, has a stiff reputation penalty and is related to some systems that can restrict the account's ability to create new posts.

I really don't want for the diamond moderators to find ourselves in the position of suspending human users for using em-dashes — such superficial "AI giveaways" have particularly low reliability. The more we can crowdsource the detection, the better our outcome will be.

I had a long paragraph here about how much I dislike failing the Turing Test, but I can't quite make it a productive thing to say in public rather than just a rant.

The policy is

Generative artificial intelligence (a.k.a. GPT, LLM, generative AI, genAI) tools may not be used to generate content for Physics Stack Exchange.

If you see it, flag it.

I would like to strongly encourage flaggers to use the "standard flags," which put flagged posts into the review queues, before resorting to custom flags which are seen only by diamond moderators. The appropriate flag is either "very low quality" (for "severe content problems") or "rude or abusive" (for wasting everyone's time and effort). The "rude" flag, if validated by the community, has a stiff reputation penalty and is related to some systems that can restrict the account's ability to create new posts.

I really don't want for the diamond moderators to find ourselves in the position of suspending human users for using em-dashes — such superficial "AI giveaways" have particularly low reliability. The more we can crowdsource the detection, the better our outcome will be.

I had a long paragraph here about how much I dislike failing the Turing Test, but I can't quite make it a productive thing to say in public rather than just a rant.

The policy is

Generative artificial intelligence (a.k.a. GPT, LLM, generative AI, genAI) tools may not be used to generate content for Physics Stack Exchange.

If you see it, flag it.

I would like to strongly encourage flaggers to use the "standard flags," which put flagged posts into the review queues, before resorting to custom flags which are seen only by diamond moderators. The appropriate flag is either "very low quality" (for "severe content problems") or "rude or abusive" (for wasting everyone's time and effort). The "rude" flag, if validated by the community, has a stiff reputation probably and is related to some systems that can restrict the account's ability to create new posts.

I really don't want for the diamond moderators to find ourselves in the position of suspending human users for using em-dashes — such superficial "AI giveaways" have particularly low reliability. The more we can crowdsource the detection, the better our outcome will be.

I had a long paragraph here about how much I dislike failing the Turing Test, but I can't quite make it a productive thing to say in public rather than just a rant.

The policy is

Generative artificial intelligence (a.k.a. GPT, LLM, generative AI, genAI) tools may not be used to generate content for Physics Stack Exchange.

If you see it, flag it.

I would like to strongly encourage flaggers to use the "standard flags," which put flagged posts into the review queues, before resorting to custom flags which are seen only by diamond moderators. The appropriate flag is either "very low quality" (for "severe content problems") or "rude or abusive" (for wasting everyone's time and effort). The "rude" flag, if validated by the community, has a stiff reputation penalty and is related to some systems that can restrict the account's ability to create new posts.

I really don't want for the diamond moderators to find ourselves in the position of suspending human users for using em-dashes — such superficial "AI giveaways" have particularly low reliability. The more we can crowdsource the detection, the better our outcome will be.

I had a long paragraph here about how much I dislike failing the Turing Test, but I can't quite make it a productive thing to say in public rather than just a rant.