Und zur Argumentation dachte ich noch an sprechakt Theorie: man kauft ein non-fiktion Buch zu erziehungserdwhrugnen in der Annahme, dass jemand glaubt, was darin dargestellt wird. Bei KI Autorenschaft wird nur etwas repräsentiert, aber nichts behauptet.

Technische Begriffe --> Fachbegriffe

Hinsichtlich der KI Bücher: sucht ggf. mal nach tortured phrases (falsch paraphrasierte technische Begriffe) 😅. AI publications sind auch in der Forschung ein großes Problem - und tortured phrases ein Ansatz zur Detektion. www.nature.com/articles/d41...

Sure... But currently everyone can just let an ai agent fill their survey. This requires more effort.

This response just deserves a heart ❤️.

Would also add "disable copy/paste with javascript" & "track mouse movement" a successful measures against AI agents.

And now 5 hours of cleaning... Indoor sanding is no fun 😅

That's really an amazing idea! I would even be interested in tracing these claims beyond ML - a lot of visionary promises travel from Nano, to SynthBio, to AI, to Quantum... I am very curious to learn more about your ideas for this tool!! 🔥 A dictionary approach for each social claim? modal verbs?

I've seen this phrase used before to describe papers that have vast supplements with many sub-analyses that supposedly address every concern. Would take a year to review it all, so no peer review was done in effect.

The report doesn’t mention the Netherlands - there’s no official PEF set, so the conservative default of 1.0 is assumed, making wood ovens seem worse than gas, and therefore ignored in the energy label. Same problem btw with district heating. Who knew energy labels could be such a rabbit hole? (2/2)