tools like these are used to reject CVs and grade school papers btw

no matter how much ai is trash do NOT use ai checkers, they do not work

Still no statement from Mary. Sounds like she is guilty and doesn’t know how to respond.

Her defense was that it wasn't an "artificial" intelligence: "It's alive. It's alive!"

So the AI thinks this human-made text is actually AI-made and offers an AI tool that'll turn this human-made text into an AI-made text that'll appear more human than the human-made text? I wonder how it'd rewrite this paragraph.

Sometimes it feels like the formal texts I write (like anything I write in the context of a job application) sound a bit like AI, but I just try to immitate the dumb way HR people write their job postings.

She used the inhouse LLM abby normal.

I think this is the most convincing proof that time travel is possible I've seen so far.

LLMs are predictive models. They scraped as much text as possible to create a model that predicts the next word accurately. To generate text, the LLM assembles a sequence of likely next words.

That exact same sort of model can be turned around and asked, how closely did the actual next word match the predicted one? Good test for training the LLM. A better model will make more accurate predictions.

AI checkers are usually doing that test. Does the real text match what the AI predicted? It sounds like a test of the text, but it really isn't. In this case, yes. Of course an AI trained on Mary Shelly's Frankenstein can accurately predict the next word of Mary Shelly's Frankenstein. It has the whole book memorized, if it were accurate to anthropomorphize computer code.

So the "checker" calls it AI generated. These checkers don't work.

It is just comparing against well-known public texts available to AI crawlers.

Perhaps that so many people have quoted that chapter in college and high school papers, book review and film reviews, and cultural criticism that maybe there is a weird "shoot the moon" situation where a "works of origin" begin to look like a "works of derivation" in LLMs.

People somehow fail to realize that the AI checker is also AI which is basically just an electric dumbass

If Mary was smart she would have used the Free AI Text Humanizer.

I mean, scanning a well known piece of literature which likely exists online in its entirety is an obvious way to generate a false positive. This doesn't mean that these tools can't be useful. You need to understand how to use them. When it's appropriate, what context, how much trust to attribute to it, and what other tools you might use along side it. At the end of the day, it's up to the human to be informed, critical, and to form reasonable suspicions or judgements. This isn't novel to AI use, but most tools.