Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Blog

Welcome to Codidact Meta!

Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.

Comments on Clarifying Codidact's position on AI-generated content

Post

Clarifying Codidact's position on AI-generated content

+64
−1

Given recent controversies on various platforms involving AI-generated content, which have resulted in some attention being directed towards our platform, we wanted to clarify where we stand when it comes to this issue.

Presenting AI-generated content as your own work is a violation of our policies by every measure.
Presenting any non-original work as if it were your own is first and foremost plagiarism. If you are copying from somewhere else, you must provide proper attribution and respect the license or copyright of the work.

Our platform is designed to be a place where communities can host high-quality, peer-reviewed information. AI-generated content is neither of those. It is known for "hallucinating" facts, and often misrepresents information in subtle ways that often go unnoticed by those not experts in the subject matter. Its output cannot be trusted, and using it to generate information risks spreading misinformation and entirely fictitious sources.

From our point of view, the use of AI-generated content, particularly Large Language Model (LLM) generated content, constitutes an abuse of the platform, and moderators are empowered to remove such content and issue warnings as they see fit. The Community Team is available to provide support and guidance, and to review any cases where there's doubt as to if it's actually AI-generated or not.

Of course, while this is where the Codidact Team stands on this issue, any community on our network or using our platform is welcome to determine for themselves what their position is on this issue. If your community decides that actually AI-generated answers are your cup of tea, that's your prerogative, as long as proper attribution is given. But the default policy that is in place unless a community decides otherwise is that LLM- and AI-generated content, by themselves, are not considered acceptable to post as questions, answers, articles, or otherwise on our platform.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

3 comment threads

Self-hosting, licence, proper citation (2 comments)
Citing and linking to ChatGPT a violation too? (4 comments)
Questions about generating content? (4 comments)
Questions about generating content?
mcalex‭ wrote over 1 year ago

Getting in early, as I expect this will become an IT 'skill' down the track. (A quick search shows udemy and coursera courses on it). What are the opinions of questions asking for assistance with writing ChatGPT et al prompts? Are they considered on-topic?

Mithical‭ wrote over 1 year ago

That would have to be determined on a community-level basis, mcalex‭. I don't believe that we currently have a community where that would be on-topic, although the Power Users and Software Dev folks can correct me if I'm wrong.

Chindraba‭ wrote over 1 year ago

I'm new here, and cannot speak to the rules on the platform, or any of the sites. My view is that this type of question, and usage would be the same as any other program or system. As an example, though there may or may not be a community where it applies, asking how to get the date to format correctly in LibreOffice Calc, or how to control the sorting of columns in the output of the Linux top command. It is not "generated" content from AI, it is usage of a program, which just happens to be AI or a LLM. The content, and more specifically the potential quality of that content, are where the problems arise. Still, I could see questions being to pointless in quality themselves, as with any other subject. "How do I write an essay in Word?" isn't likely to be of much value even for a site where Word is on-topic and in scope.

Monica Cellio‭ wrote over 1 year ago

Chindraba‭, I think you've nailed it. Questions about using ChatGPT are like questions about using Word or Postgres or git etc. If the question fits otherwise in a community's scope, isn't too broad, etc., I don't see a problem.