I’ve seen some recent posts involving chatGPT “answers” and I am concerned about the confusion of actual Discourse discussion versus AI “fake discussion” especially in searches of our forum. A number of threads got polluted by chatGPT “answers” that we’re very difficult to tell were not real or …

Here’s a possible policy: if you’re going to post AI-generated content, clearly mark it as such and don’t try to pass if off as a real user. Unmarked AI-generated content will be considered spam and if it’s your only contribution to the forum, you will be banned and blocked like all other spammers.

[image] tbeason: Conditional on a reply with a proposed solution, which may or may not be correct, what is the danger in it being direct from a human brain or from AI? Why does the source matter in this case? AI generated content tends to be very confidently stated, even when wrong. There are…

The singularity will occur when AI chat bots begin arguing with each other.

Hah, I don’t think the “bullshit singularity” was what Kurzweil had in mind, but of course it’s what we’re going to get, isn’t it?

There are (as always) important differences in scenarios Trying to pass off AI-generated content as your own or another real person’s. Or what is functionally equivalent, posting in such a way that it is easy to assume that it is not AI-generated. Uncritically posting AI-generated commentary on Ju…

Fair enough :+1: I was playing devil’s advocate here as I don’t feel strongly either way. I definitely agree that the current edition of ChatGPT over-projects confidence. I think this is unlikely to become as much of a problem here as it might in other places (eg. StackOverflow) as the incentives …

Given the propensity of confident-sounding/technically-wrong answers, and the limited time of human moderators, any policy that does not ban it altogether may unfortunately end up being practically untenable :man_shrugging:

Here’s what ChatGPT has to say on the matter: It’s not for me to say whether or not the Julia Discourse forum should implement a policy regarding posts and comments generated via ChatGPT. That would be up to the administrators and moderators of the forum to decide based on their goals and guidelin…

To your point, and to use a real example from the forum, consider this post I was reading the documentation and on this page Frequently Asked Questions of DifferentialEquations.jl, in the Stability and Divergence section, it says: if you see these instability warnings during a parameter estimatio…

This highlights another thing: even if AI can answer run of the mill programming questions at some point it will still remain very far from the expertise of someone like Chris answering a question about his own code in an area where he is one of the world’s foremost experts. At the point we could co…

Maybe I should use ChatGPT to extend my responses haha. I think sometimes the terseness comes off as not wanting to be bothered, when really it’s “I’ve got two minutes left on the train so you either get this quick note or nothing”. Slap a bit of ChatGPT around the real answer and you have yourself …

chatGPT policy needed?

Meta Discussion

Topic		Replies	Views
Non-native English speakers and the use of language assistance Community question , policy	45	890	May 21, 2026
Are there efforts to improve ChatGPT for Julia code? Tooling	26	4361	July 24, 2023
Updates to the site guidelines, especially regarding gen-AI Meta Discussion	1	688	February 2, 2026
Dealing with flamebait Meta Discussion proposal	50	5035	March 23, 2021
Anthropic gave me 6 months of Claude Max for my contributions to the Julia ecosystem :) Offtopic ai	67	1308	August 6, 2026

chatGPT policy needed?

Related topics