Hacker News Reader

Isn't everybody always gushing about how LLMs are supposed to get better all the time? If that's true then detecting generated fluff will be a moving target and an incessant arms race, just like SEO. There is no escape.

View on HN

Yep, that's what I've been thinking since people started talking about it. I hear that AI plagiarism detectors can never work, since LLM output can never be detected with any accuracy. Yet I also hear that LLMs-in-training easily sift out any generated content from their input data, so that recursion is a non-issue. It doesn't make much sense to have it both ways.

I wonder if the truth about sifting out synthetic training data is based on signals separate from the content itself. Signals such as the source of the data, reported author, links to/from etc.

These signals would be unavailable to a plagiarism/ai detector

Reply on news.ycombinator.com