It seems vitally important to some to know whether a text was composed by a human or an AI. I don't understand *why* this is so important (surely the text should stand on its own merits, or lack of them?) but I concede that such people exist. Okay, fine. There are people who claim that they can hear a difference if they replace the plastic knobs on their audio equipment with wooden ones. In itself, this isn't going to harm anything (other than their bank accounts) and provides some harmless amusement at their gullibility for the rest of us. The AI v. human people are constantly searching for a "tell" — some simple-minded segmentation algorithm by which AI-written and human-written texts can be separated. (OMG! I used an em dash! Some are going to stop reading here. 😀) Most of these "tells" are are just plain dumb. Let's say someone observes that architects use the word "fascia" far more often than non-architects (I haven't tested this, but I feel pretty confident that it's true). Can you then conclude that any text containing the word "fascia" was written by an architect, or even was *likely* written by an architect? No, you cannot. Non-architects use the word all the time. Maybe the person was talking about the home repair he did last weekend. Maybe it's an internal memo at Lowes, talking about which items should be listed in this this week's flyer. Maybe it's someone with such terrible keyboard skills that his spell checker has confused "fascist" with "fascia", and he's blindly accepted the suggested change. There's absolutely no way to tell based on the presence of the word per se. Now, if you had a large sample of texts written by the person over a long period of time (the time period is also important — our homeowner might write a lot of "fascia" texts while the repair is in progress, then never use the word again), which *as a whole* contained a disproportionate number of uses of "fascia", you could start to feel more confident that he is an architect (though maybe not even then... he might be a building contractor — or a surgeon). From a single example? Sheer nonsense. (Oops! I did it again! Twice! Definitely a bot!) Why is this important? If it were just a matter of people making fools of themselves (like the wooden knob folks), it wouldn't be important at all. However, people are being given bad grades, perhaps even losing their jobs, based on one of these alleged "tells". That is completely unacceptable. Even if such a "tell" did exist (which it doesn't), the likelihood that it would continue to work a year from now (or even six months from now) is very small. I follow this field fairly closely, yet I'm constantly surprised at how far each new generation has come. Rather than wasting time looking for a "tell", teachers should concentrate on adapting themselves and their teaching methods to a world where AIs exist. They should learn about AIs themselves, then teach their students how to use them in a responsible manner. They're not going away. One interesting idea I've seen: the students are assigned a topic, then given (say) a week to learn as much about the topic as they can. Every source is fair game. Books, Wikipedia, AIs, YouTube videos, you name it. Evaluating the credibility of the source is part of the task. Then they're put in a proctored exam room and asked to produce an outline of the topic. The students should be given different topics, of course. You don't want one student (or a small group) generating an outline for the others to cram. There are many other things that could be done. Use your imagination! If you don't have one of those, perhaps you could ask an AI for help. 😀

Love it.

Absolutely.

From a set of animated tarot cards I've been working on. Made with Grok Imagine.

I would totally eat a T. Rex.

It's obvious, right?

Rate your skills 🔥 Cooking: 8/10 Singing: 3/10 Gaming: 5/10 Photography: 8/10 Drawing: 2/10 Replying fast: 9/10 Keeping secrets: I'm sorry, that's classified. Slurs known: 10/10

Works for me.