Hacker News Reader

Comment by sheept | Hacker News Reader

a reliable giveaway for AI generated videos is just a quick glance at the account's post history—the videos will look frequent, repetitive, and lack a consistent subject/background—and that's not something that'll go away when AI videos get better

View on HN

> [...] and lack a consistent subject/background—and that's not something that'll go away when AI videos get better

Why not? Surely you can ask your friendly neighbourhood AI to run a consistent channel for you?

AI is capable of consistent characters now, yes, but the platforms themselves provide little incentive to. TikTok/Instagram Reels are designed to serve recommendations, not a user-curated feed of people you follow, so consistency is not needed for virality

Or they are reposting other people's content

Sort by oldest. If the videos go back more than 3 years watch an old one. So many times the person narrating the old vids is nothing like the new vids and a dead ringer for AI. If the account is less than a year old, 100% AI.

New AI narration is a dead giveaway to us but many people can’t tell they’re not listening to a human. It is very concerning.

How can they look repetitive while being inconsistent? Do you mean in terms of presentation / "editing" style?

I actually avoid most YouTube channels that upload too frequently. Especially with consistent schedules.

Even if I'm 100% certain it's not AI slop, it's still a very strong indicator that the videos are some kind of slop.

Content farms, whether AI generated or not their incentive is to pump out low quality high output. Most of their content even it involves a human narrator are heavily packed with AI generated media.

A giveaway for detecting AI-generated text is the use of em-dashes, as noted in op - you are caught bang to rights!

Some keyboards and operating systems — iOS is one of them — convert two dashes into an emdash.

And macOS, at least my keyboard layout, has both en and em dashes easily typeable with Alt+- and Alt+Shift+- respectively.

I use emdashes and endashes all the time—but maybe that's because I'm an academic?

I use them – well, mostly en dashes because that's the custom where I'm from – because I'm a bit of a typography nerd and have grown to dislike the barrenness of ASCII.

I can’t wait for my keyboard to start auto-completing “Your” with “are absolutely right!”

In this case Apple has cared about typography since its very beginning. Steve Jobs obsessed over it. The OS also replaces simple quotes with fancier ones.

I do the same on my websites. It's embedded into my static site generator.

Very related: https://practicaltypography.com/

Agreed that is useful, despite the unintended consequences of dash meddling.

Not long ago, a statistical study found that AI almost always has an 'e' in its output. It is a firm indicator of AI slop. If you catch a post with an 'e', pay it no mind: it's probably AI.

Uh-oh. Caught you. Bang to rights! That post is firmly AI. Bad. Nobody should mind your robot posts.

I'm incredibly impressed that you managed to make that whole message without a single usage of the most frequently used letter, except in your quotations.

Such omission is a hobby of many WWW folk. I can, in fact, think back to finding a community on R*ddit known as "AVoid5", which had this trial as its main point.

Down with that foul fifth glyph! Down, I say!

second vowel actually.

Bet they asked an AI to make the bit work /s

:-D

I did ask G'mini for synonyms. And to do a cursory count of e's in my post. Just as a 2nd opinion. It found only glyphs with quotation marks around it. It graciously put forward a proxy for that: "the fifth letter".

It's not oft that you run into such alluring confirmation of your point.

I'm having my thumbs-up back >:(

My first post took around 6 min & a dictionary. This post took 3. It's a quick skill.

No LLMs. Ctrl+f shows you all your 'e's without switching away from this tab. (And why count it? How many is not important, you can simply look if any occur and that's it)

I apprEciatE your dEdication to ExclusivEly using 'e' in quotEd rEfErEncE, but not in thE rEst of your clEarly human-authorEd tExt.

I rEgrEt that I havE not donE thE samE, but plEase accEpt bad formatting as a countErpoint.

Finally a human in this forum. Many moons did I long for this contact.

(Assuming you did actually hand craft that I thumbs-up both your humor and industry good sir)

https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/47342

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Disparition_(roman)

nice try but u used caps and punctuation lol bot /s

My AI generator loves to write ergo, concordantly, and vis-a-vis.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com