It happened again. Link to story: https://www.harpersbazaar.com/uk/culture/a71615663/short-story-competition-winner-2026/
>>25354388Lol
>>25354388all this proves is that contest judges are the retards we always thought they were.
>>25354388i was going to say the detectors aren't very good, but it does truly read like AI slop
>>25354388What is Pangram's track record with real writing? I assume its false-positive rate is extremely high.
>>25354388If you accuse someone of this you should put a bit more effort into the accusation. Just citing a Pangram score is pretty lazy. At least give an overview of the stylistic attributes that you think hint at LLM genesis.
>>25354388I wouldn't put it past the judges to be utterly retarded, but I also wouldn't be surprised if all these AI-generated stories are winning as some sort of marketing campaign for investors and the magazines are just being bribed.
>>25354388>Deepa>it's AIlike pottery
>>25354388The stuff that is popular these days feels very close to AI as it is. This happening isn't surprising to me.
>>25354402>>25354418Pangram's the only real-deal detector I believe Their false-positive rate is extremely low and their positive detection rate is almost as good - you can trick the detector with an elaborate llm based set up, but most people won't bother trying.
>>25354430>Just citing a Pangram score is pretty lazy.Read the excerpt dumbass.
>>25354388Now, not only do I have to worry about people hating my work, I also have to worry about people thinking it's AI.
>>25354502Another retard who can't read.
>>25354388Fucking kek, AI is so obvious even without any detectors. These people are just retarded clowns who don't actually read anything and have no reading comprehension
>>25354388>colonised by mossAhh, a story about a pajeeta in London, dealing with the trauma ofcolonialism. This story won by its subjectm atter.
I liked the Caribbean one better.The author here is an Indian diasparoid humanities professor with long COVID btw.
>>25354395Or that the human brain naturally like aggregated content. which is what the human brain does as well.
Anyone think they're doing it on purpose to garner attention? No one would care about these literary prizes otherwise.
>THE OLD MAN AND THE SAR>He was an old man who fished alone in a skiff in the Gulf Stream and he had gone eighty-four days now without taking a fish. In the first forty days a boy had been with him. But after forty days without a fish the boy's parents had told him that the old man was now definitely and finally salao, which is the worst form of unlucky, and the boy had gone at their orders in another boat which caught three good fish the first week. It made the boy sad to see the old man come in each day with his skiff empty and he always went down to help him carry either the coiled lines or the gaff and harpoon and the sail that was furled around the mast. The sail was patched with flour sacks and, furled, it looked like the flag of permanent defeat.>The old man was thin and gaunt with deep wrinkles in the back of his neck. The brown blotches of the benevolent skin cancer the sun brings from its reflection on the tropic sea were on his cheeks. The blotches ran well down the sides of his face and his hands had the deep-creased scars from handling heavy fish on the cords. But none of these scars were fresh. They were as old as erosions in a fishless desert.>Everything about him was old except his eyes and they were the same color as the sea and were cheerful and undefeated.
>>25354388It reads like AI
>>25354460I'm afraid to post a sample of my writing in it for fear that it will give a false positive and break my heart
>>25354434>>25354591A mix of both? The experts award and praise based on content that their consumers (leftist liberals) approve of. The AI praise is to easily lull their consumers into accepting it as good, empowering, avant-garde, etc.It would not surprise me if in few years they start making long ass winded interpretative essays on AIslop like they do with conceptual art.
>>25354544>with long COVIDI missed this at the time but the Commonwealth winner also seemed to excuse his AI writing by talking about how hard it is for him to type because of "chronic health conditions"> “My writing process is unusual”, Nazir told the Observer via email in late May. “It is conducted entirely on an Android phone. This is a necessity driven by chronic health conditions which make sustained, desk-bound typing physically impossible. That is why I rely on speech-to-text to do my writing, followed by minimal keyboard editing, along with the same process of speech-to-text. I have used this in my professional life and also to produce my story for the Commonwealth competition.”I have seen a lot of leftists who you would expect to be anti-AI be really pro-AI because they think they're "leveling the playing field" against more abled people.
Based AI always winning and people seerhing about le AI slop.
>>25354682every age has its contingent of servile weaklings whose only desire is to be on the side of the current overlord
>>25354388This will continue happening
>>25354388Does anyone take competitions or awards like this seriously?
>>25354892Nobody worth taking seriously takes awards like this seriously
>>25354418pangram is supposedly designed to minimize false positives, at the expense of allowing a lot of false negatives. in practice it's overindexed on the tics of current models, a human imitating claude can fool it and a human who puts some effort into prompting can get an LLM output that will fool it.i don't trust pangram but just look at the text. this is a case where somebody read it, thought "this is clearly AI" and ran it through to corroborate that instinct, rather than a case of running everything through the detector and making accusations when it comes up positive.
>>25354388>No official news saying this>The guy who claims this uses a paywalled AI detector>All the free AI detector websites say it's written by a human beingIs this just a ruse to sell subscriptions to... Pangr*m?Or a pakistani who is butthurt because a jeet won the award?
>>25354388can't read the story, it's behind a paywall.
>reading anything written after 2023
>>25354929>can't get around paywalls in 2026ngmi
>>25354887What are you doing to stop it?
>>25354912Wow, that guy is tweeting from the underworld.
>>25354933I don't care enough. The real question is why are 4chan users posting actual links and not archives or just copy pasting the story here?
They should honestly just have 2 seperate prizes: one for actual writing and another for AI enhanced. With how manipulative and sus legacy media is they can honestly just get away with putting their thumbs on the scale to make sure the AI winner isn't as good as the winner written entirely by a human.
>>25354949>I don't care enough.Then stop seething that you had to research something for yourself instead of being spoonfed, retard. Idiots like you are the reason using AI to be lazy is fast becoming the standard of how it is used.
>>25354388AI detectors are just more AI slop for fucks sake. If you criticize AI and then blindly trust the AI that told you the first text was AI you’re so fucking stupid you need the Ol Yeller treatment.
>>25354912> Is this just a ruse to sell subscriptions to... Pangr*m?It’s the same guy posting all these threads because he recycles the exact point about “false-positive rate” (with no proof of course). Jeets are very invested in selling the idea that everything is AI and that nobody can tell, why that is so is a bit more unclear, perhaps because they’re so used to faking all their own work.
>>25354958>using AI as a tool is the same as using it as a crutch Lol, no.
>>25354949>um sweaty it's heckin paywalled soooo>lol you can't get around a paywall?>Actually I've decided I don't care so therelmfao
>>25354964Nobody is buying a sub to your investor scam AI Rajeesh.
I posted this on /v/ but AI wins all the writing competitions because it's trained to be the exact furthest-left-but-in-the-overton-window personality all of the lit judges are
>>25354976> AI wins all the writing competitionsYour evidence being?
>>25354460> Their false-positive rate is extremely lowIs it? I inputted text that is mostly AI generated and it came back as 100% human. So I’m either a master prompter or this thing isn’t very good at its job.
>>25354972Not an argument, Pablo. The fact is using software to detect AI isn't the same thing as using AI as a means of technoplagiarism. We have a very small window in which to set the tone needed so that AI being used as a crutch is derided and looked down upon. Impotently screeching about AI in general isn't going to cut it.
>>25354983It's a losing battle anyway. The only option is to have a reservoir of everything AI writes do you can check against it and that isn't feasible or sustainable. AI writing will get less and less detectable to the point crying about it will be as useless/impotent as calling everyone who disagrees with you a jew or jeet. The only weapon against it is setting the precedent of social stigma and maintaining it.
>>25354987>The only weapon against it is setting the precedent of social stigma and maintaining it.There is no social stigma to be applied because there is no literary culture. I have never met a single person IRL who reads "highbrow" stuff, so who is getting stigmatized?
>>25354995People who can't make even the most meager of living anymore?
>>25354388All this talk about AI detectors is pointless because you don't even need an AI detector to tell it's obviously AI. It's not even subtle.>The tree knew before she did – and it waited. Deepa would realise this later, when clarity returned – if it ever did. For now, the knowing belonged to something older than her, something rooted and patient. That October afternoon, walking through Victoria Park with her feet carrying her nowhere she meant to go, she knew only the tiredness. Bone-deep, marrow-deep. The kind that sleep couldn’t touch, that accumulated in the body like silt.
>>25354995>There is no social stigma to be appliedThere already is a stigma against using AI for creative pursuits, brainlet. Why do you think articles like OP keep being written?
>>25354545>SARRRRRR
>>25355039>All this talk about AI detectors is pointless because you don't even need an AI detector to tell it's obviously AI."It's only a problem when I become aware of it. All the AI texts that I don't even recognize as such are okay."
>>25354388These a novelists are not worth saving.
>>25356079Why are you SARRRing me, I'm right?
>>25354983that isn't a false positive - a false positive would be human text being flagged as AIthis is a failure case in true positive detection but it's a preferable failure to falsely claiming it's 100% ai
>>25354983>>25357991or, in other words, that's a false negative, not a false positive
>>25355039This reads like Ram V.I didn't know indians had an entire writing style.Any novel rec with this style?
>>25354460I've gotten it to spit out false positives just by replacing commas with em dashes and other such. There is absolutely no regulation on their marketing, so if you just accept their 1:10,000 error rate bullshit I have a bridge to sell you...
>>25356084>All the AI texts that I don't even recognize as such are okayYeah, they are. We're still waiting for the first one tho
AI is a problem for litfic fags who are lost in their verbal circus tricks to the point that even the legitimate human productions are unintelligible hogwash and indistinguishable from machinisms. When a story needs to have some kind of point or a coherent plotline the clanker falls apart, but so do these pseud writers
>>25358077
>>25354460>>Pangram's the only real-deal detector I believeYou've been misled. It's shit.
>>25358077clank a nutsac
>>25354545>It was a dark and stormy night BOOOOOOOOO GET OUT OF TOWN>It wasn't a dark and stormy night -- It was an apocalypseVGH THE SINGULARITY IS HERE HUMAN CONSCIOUSNESS IS AN ANACHRONISM
>>25358077This. It's not that the AI produces convincingly human writing, it's that these people write like a chatbot.
>>25354395If anything it proves that human writers today have stagnated. AI is just a data aggregator; it's only putting together words based on what it has read from human writers of the past. You could argue that human writers do the same thing of course. But if writers today are consistently getting outcompeted by so-called AI slop, that's a pretty damning statement about them, wouldn't you think?
>>25358343>But if writers today are consistently getting outcompeted by so-called AI slop, that's a pretty damning statement about them, wouldn't you think?No, because the "competition" is being judged by braindead morons. AI slop "winning" is the only reason we know about this idiot contest.
