Detecting AI generated content for Outsourced Content.

I put some articles from the website I sold into various AI content detectors and the majority of them are claiming the content that I wrote, that ranked well, that was attractive enough for a buyer to pay a 200x multiple for, was written by AI.
 
Sorry to bump an old thread, but most AI content checkers don't work. Even OpenAI stopped developing their own tool, because it simply failed. Yeah, the creator of ChatGPT cannot create a tool that accurately detects AI content. Here's the article about it.

OpenAI’s AI Text Classifier is no longer available. The tool failed to accurately classify whether a human or AI wrote submitted text, the company confirmed.
"Generative language models have improved drastically, and can now produce realistic text outputs that are difficult to distinguish from human-written content," the paper reads.

Originality AI attracts its clientele because it's a paid product, and when people pay for a service/product, they think it actually works. It's a basic concept in marketing - just raise the price for a product/service, and you'll create a "sense" of higher quality. Just ask $2 for a pizza and everyone will think it's crap. Ask $50 for a pizza, and some people will think it's fine cuisine, even though it's the same frozen pizza.

The only accurate way to check if the content you buy is not AI is to get the Google doc link from the writer, which lets you see the edits.
 
tziahs said:
The only accurate way to check if the content you buy is not AI is to get the Google doc link from the writer, which lets you see the edits.
Click to expand...
any tips for how to outsource this "edit check" in a systematic way?

I have a VA running my content from writers through https://openai-openai-detector.hf.space/ https://www.quetext.com/plagiarism-checker and https://app.originality.ai/content-scan and it has to pass all of them. But checking a google doc for "time between edits" or similar is a more complex task.
 
zelch said:
any tips for how to outsource this "edit check" in a systematic way?

I have a VA running my content from writers through https://openai-openai-detector.hf.space/ https://www.quetext.com/plagiarism-checker and https://app.originality.ai/content-scan and it has to pass all of them. But checking a google doc for "time between edits" or similar is a more complex task.
Click to expand...
I used to check whether my previously written articles were AI-generated. I did it for fun, but the results were not funny at all.

Most of them came back as AI-generated, even though some were written back in 2015-2016, when AI couldn't really write anything. Even opinion pieces came back as AI-generated, as well as some product reviews. Surprisingly, blogs like "How to use a shovel" came back as written by a human.

Head over to r/freelancewriters on reddit and see how many professional writers complain about the poor results returned by these checkers. Some lost clients because of it, only to have them come back to apologize, and ask for more content (all in a matter of months). Some of their clients even stopped checking whether the content was AI-generated or not. Times are weird...

Getting back to your question, I really don't have an answer. If you feel like the blog seems AI-generated (fluff, impersonal, random facts, weird language), you should do a quick check in the edits history of the document. If something weird pops up, do a full revision.

Unfortunately, I don't think there's a bulletproof way to determine whether a piece of content is done by AI or by a human. Just keep in mind that some humans really write like AI (fluff, impersonal, and so on)...
 
tziahs said:
Unfortunately, I don't think there's a bulletproof way to determine whether a piece of content is done by AI or by a human. Just keep in mind that some humans really write like AI (fluff, impersonal, and so on)...
Click to expand...
What do you look for when looking at the edit history of a google doc?
 
zelch said:
What do you look for when looking at the edit history of a google doc?
Click to expand...
Check how much time the writer spent on the article. A 1,000-word blog, with a medium difficulty level, should take at least 1 hour to write.
Check if there are no large copy-pasted fragments.
Check if the writer rewrote-rephrased some sections of the article (many writers do this when writing naturally, so it's a good indication it was written by a human).
 
wikibum said:
Based on that screenshot, which is from this post. Quetext seems to be the one that caught most of the ai content (or failed it), so naturally I tested it against some content. I also looked around their documentation, but was not able to find anything relating to ai content detection. It just detects plagiarism and it gives a percentage score.
Click to expand...
fyi Quetext says their A.I. detector is "coming soon" https://www.quetext.com/ai-detector not sure what their launch date is. But it has been "coming soon" since at least June.
 
tziahs said:
Check how much time the writer spent on the article. A 1,000-word blog, with a medium difficulty level, should take at least 1 hour to write.
Click to expand...

Why would a writer use Google doc instead of Word or Apple's Pages to make edits to content?
 
CCarter said:
Why would a writer use Google doc instead of Word or Apple's Pages to make edits to content?
Click to expand...
I've used both.

Google docs can be beneficial for the reasons stipulated in this thread. You can check history edits and it's beneficial to work in a cloud environment that all parties have access to - the writer, the reviewer (if needed), and the person posting the content.

To illustrate:
  • My YMYL stuff I have a Writer (a qualified one at that) work in Google Docs to write content.
  • Once an article is done, it's added to our Google sheet for content/keywords via a shareable Google doc link.
  • The word count is grabbed via the Google doc and the writer adds the URL to the sheet.
  • The writer marks the keyword as "Written" after which I send that shareable URL to the reviewer, to review.
  • If the reviewer finds an error in the information, he marks the shared document - the Writer can see changes in real-time (also gets notified of the issue via Google docs/email). Once the issue is corrected the Writer checks the box that the change was made.
  • My writer is paid weekly. Every week I grab the total word count they listed in the Google sheet, total it, run it through a calculator and pay them; I then mark the sheet that the article was paid for.
  • The reviewer we do content in batches as it's far easier. He essentially reviews articles weekly.
All the above stuff is cumbersome to transfer back and forth via Skype to multiple different People. There are likely more efficient platforms that people use but for some reason most of the "SEO World" is stuck using Skype to interact with one another.

Side note: Ages back some of my Writers didn't have software like the Microsoft Office suite, let alone a Macbook. Which I then had them use Openoffice.
 
CCarter said:
Why would a writer use Google doc instead of Word or Apple's Pages to make edits to content?
Click to expand...
Some clients ask writers to use Google docs specifically to make sure they are not using AI, and to be able to check the edits history.
 
tziahs said:
Some clients ask writers to use Google docs specifically to make sure they are not using AI, and to be able to check the edits history.
Click to expand...
Not to get off topic, and just to throw this out there, but the same logic is used in schools right now to try to prevent students from using GAI to do everything. With that generation being how they apparently are, I'm sure that plenty of them are using GAI on another device and then simply typing it into Google Docs on the other screen, but it is what it is.
 
JesseEddleman said:
Not to get off topic, and just to throw this out there, but the same logic is used in schools right now to try to prevent students from using GAI to do everything. With that generation being how they apparently are, I'm sure that plenty of them are using GAI on another device and then simply typing it into Google Docs on the other screen, but it is what it is.
Click to expand...
True.

For some topics, like "How to Dig A Hole", it's really impossible to be 100 percent sure your writer didn't use AI. If your writer really wants to screw you over, he can use AI without you knowing about it. Like you said, just open different tabs and copy word for word what the AI wrote.

On the other hand, for topics like "Discuss the Latest Anti-Inflation Policy in Guatemala and How It May Affect The Elections Next Month", it's a different story. You can't use AI for these topics, even if you are the King of Prompts.
 
tziahs said:
On the other hand, for topics like "Discuss the Latest Anti-Inflation Policy in Guatemala and How It May Affect The Elections Next Month", it's a different story. You can't use AI for these topics, even if you are the King of Prompts.
Click to expand...

I think you can get out of AI better than you'd get from most human writers under 50p/word... (on such a heavy topic as that).

Sure you have to spend some time thinking of what information to tell it to gather from the web first and what analysis it should do with said information but if you're requesting such an article I suppose you'd probably end up having to provide your human with a lot of support - your cheap human probably an insane amount more than you have to give the AI to get a useful article.

What's funny to me about AI detection is that a 13 year old rewriting in their own words for an assignment, but making it worse due to lack of understanding, the AI article they had say gpt4 + webpilot research and produce for them on that topic (I had a go but it seemed confused by the fact the election had already been done etc and I didn't really want an article about Guatemala so didn't spend much time on it) will pass AI detection but the slightly better AI written version will fail detection.

Which one should perform better on the web? I'm not sure as Google becomes more and more concerned about AI spam the crappy 13 year old rewritten version won't be the one that 'wins' but we'll see I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back