AI or LLM

[Voboy]

I'm still pretty new to the site, but do the owners hate transparency that much? And are they so concerned with control that they'd compromise the process?

Yes.

Accept it or move along to another site. Sorry, but YEARS of exactly your sort of posts have made me concise.

 

[BeechLeaf]

or they themselves make extensive use of AI.

An automatic scan doesn't have to involve AI. Before publication, I scan my own with a Python program I wrote to check various things. With a program, I can just add new tests, and I can add new reports.

A preliminary scan on the moderator side has had years to build up a repertoire of things to search for, starting with just words ('dead', 'child', '17'), and simple punctuation (do opening and closing quotes match - the thing I once got rejected for), then add tests that correlate with what a visual scan tells you. Like full stop, close quote, capital:

"My hovercraft is full of eels." He said.

Count up violations or flags, give it a score, send higher-scoring ones to human moderation, with comments and excerpts. After years of refinement, this could be a very powerful program. If the programming team here were really good at... well in theory it could be powerful.

I have no idea whether they do do this, of course.

 

[randomletters42]

I spend quite a bit of my time trying (often failing) to intercede with the site on behalf of writers I know have not used AI.

We are all fungible commodities here, me and you. Saying you’re going to leave is totally irrelevant. Ten writers will take your place.

Go leave. There is no other viable place to publish. I’ve looked trust me.

The site is not at fault. It’s a problem created by people with the same mid set as the OP.

Last time I read your profile it was that you were quitting literotica because of fake votes. So you're saying that we should all shut up when complaining about any other site issue but you are ready to quit the site for legitimate reasons? Honestly what the hell.

 

[Voboy]

The sock puppets are sometimes SO obvious...

 

[JFoxxo]

Okay. So. Why does it make any difference? And why do you think your continuing harangues here are going to make any difference? Literotica does not accept AI-written, edited, or modified contributions now or in the foreseeable. There's an incredibly easy solution for you: find another site which does.

Does your response here make a difference? Why did you even respond in the first place? I spend most of my time on my computer, and I like to criticize things I find deserving of criticism. That's all I need.

I didn't use any AI in my work, and thus their AI filter failed. Based on what I've read, it fails A LOT. That's deserving of criticism. If you take a hard stance against AI, but can't even accurately determine what is and isn't AI, and are actively using another AI to make that determination... you end up looking pathetic and unprofessional.

 

[JFoxxo]

Yes.

Accept it or move along to another site. Sorry, but YEARS of exactly your sort of posts have made me concise.

Ah, I see. So, the owners are both against transparency, and are willing to sabotage their own site in their crusade against AI use.

That's fair I guess.

 

[StillStunned]

Ah, I see. So, the owners are both against transparency, and are willing to sabotage their own site in their crusade against AI use.

That's fair I guess.

Lit has been the world's leading erotica site for 25+ years. Far from the site being sabotaged, more stories than ever are being submitted and published.

I suspect they understand more of what's going on than you do.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Last time I read your profile it was that you were quitting literotica because of fake votes.

Untrue - I stopped publishing for 165 days until the site made me whole; which they did most spectacularly. I never left and I helped to run a competition in the intervening, as well as doing extensive alpha and beta reading for Lit stories. Get your facts right.

So you're saying that we should all shut up when complaining about any other site issue but you are ready to quit the site for legitimate reasons? Honestly what the hell.

No - I’m saying you should stop advocating for using AI to do your writing. But cool attempt to shift attention. You’ll do great here! Such a smell of troll around this thread.

 

[JFoxxo]

An automatic scan doesn't have to involve AI. Before publication, I scan my own with a Python program I wrote to check various things. With a program, I can just add new tests, and I can add new reports.

A preliminary scan on the moderator side has had years to build up a repertoire of things to search for, starting with just words ('dead', 'child', '17'), and simple punctuation (do opening and closing quotes match - the thing I once got rejected for), then add tests that correlate with what a visual scan tells you. Like full stop, close quote, capital:

"My hovercraft is full of eels." He said.

Count up violations or flags, give it a score, send higher-scoring ones to human moderation, with comments and excerpts. After years of refinement, this could be a very powerful program. If the programming team here were really good at... well in theory it could be powerful.

I have no idea whether they do do this, of course.

Considering it takes them a week to check a story, and then reject it with a generic 'this story has a high chance of AI use' justification... I'm guessing they don't make use of any of what you just mentioned.

Though your response was informative, which I very much appreciate. Thank you for that!

 

[MrPixel]

The sock puppets are sometimes SO obvious...

Such a smell of troll around this thread.

You know what? AI is getting really good these days, so I'm getting the queasy sense we are arguing with AI bots. It's doable, I've seen it in other forums. In one case the bots were seeded by the site admins with enough horsepower to "argue" with the humans. Once the admins were called out about it, it was admitted, and they weren't going to "ban" the bots because it was their attempt to foster activity in an otherwise moribund forum. End result was they chased-off the humans and the forum is more of a ghost town than it was previously.

If this guy and his sock puppet are real, then shame on us for feeding the troll.

Over and out.

 

[randomletters42]

Untrue - I stopped publishing for 165 days until the site made me whole; which they did most spectacularly. I never left and I helped to run a competition in the intervening, as well as doing extensive alpha and beta reading for Lit stories. Get your facts right.

No - I’m saying you should stop advocating for using AI to do your writing. But cool attempt to shift attention. You’ll do great here! Such a smell of troll around this thread.

I can advocate for whatever I want to. And whether you agree or not doesnt matter the least to me. Its a forum, its open for discussion. Do you see how you're not contributing at all but just trying to shut down the conversation? How about you stop responding. I thought you "gave up" already.

 

[JFoxxo]

Lit has been the world's leading erotica site for 25+ years. Far from the site being sabotaged, more stories than ever are being submitted and published.

I suspect they understand more of what's going on than you do.

AI has changed the landscape, especially over the last few years. If websites don't adapt, they'll fall out of popularity faster than you would think. In all honesty, I think them being such an old site puts them at a disadvantage. They take a hardline stance against AI without actually creating an accurate or efficient system to deal with it.

They're ripe for failure, and I can imagine will be replaced with equally popular competitors sooner rather than later.

 

[EmilyMiller]

You know what? AI is getting really good these days, so I'm getting the queasy sense we are arguing with AI bots. It's doable, I've seen it in other forums. In one case the bots were seeded by the site admins with enough horsepower to "argue" with the humans. Once the admins were called out about it, it was admitted, and they weren't going to "ban" the bots because it was their attempt to foster activity in an otherwise moribund forum. End result was they chased-off the humans and the forum is more of a ghost town than it was previously.

If this guy and his sock puppet are real, then shame on us for feeding the troll.

Over and out.

Whether human or not, I smell troll.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Yeah - this is becoming just the antagonists posting unsubstantiated shit. Have fun with that.

 

[JFoxxo]

Untrue - I stopped publishing for 165 days until the site made me whole; which they did most spectacularly. I never left and I helped to run a competition in the intervening, as well as doing extensive alpha and beta reading for Lit stories. Get your facts right.

No - I’m saying you should stop advocating for using AI to do your writing. But cool attempt to shift attention. You’ll do great here! Such a smell of troll around this thread.

I don't think they're advocating for AI content. I'm pretty sure they're advocating for Lit to just get better at their job so writers aren't shooting fish in a barrel trying to avoid flagging the filter.

 

[StillStunned]

Has anyone ever considered this? Maybe these posters who come into the AH arguing that there's nothing wrong with using AI are all alts set up by Laurel (may she live forever) to see who responds, and how. Anyone who disagrees gets added to the "nah, I don't think they're using AI" approval list, anyone who agrees gets a "keep an eye on this fucker" mark.

 

[BeechLeaf]

Reiterating that I have no idea how it works, but that never stops anyone speculating...

Any programmatic way of testing, whether AI or a bunch of hand-coded 'if x > 2', would produce an instant result - at least, far faster than Laurel yawning, printing out the next story on paper, and adjusting her glasses (which is how I picture the process). So why is there ever a delay? I think we know that most stories are published about two days after submission. Is there any large group that take rather more, but not hugely more, say four or five days? I don't think so; I think the non-fast ones are those that are pending for weeks. This sounds like a systemic glitch, not a problem with the particular story.

Query, are there ever any that are pending for weeks then get rejected for a reason other than AI? From what I've read here, AI always seems to be the rejection reason after a long delay. This again suggests there's not a 'backlog' problem as such - ones with bad punctuation don't take a couple of weeks to be addressed.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Does your response here make a difference? Why did you even respond in the first place? I spend most of my time on my computer, and I like to criticize things I find deserving of criticism. That's all I need.

I didn't use any AI in my work, and thus their AI filter failed. Based on what I've read, it fails A LOT. That's deserving of criticism. If you take a hard stance against AI, but can't even accurately determine what is and isn't AI, and are actively using another AI to make that determination... you end up looking pathetic and unprofessional.

You could have written a novella the amount of words you’ve typed on this thread. Not a very good novella admittedly, but still

 

[randomletters42]

You could have written a novella the amount of words you’ve typed on this thread. Not a very good novella admittedly, but still

Why are you responding still? Really you arent helping anything. Or contributing. Go away. "bye" as you say.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

That's just not possible. It takes someone reading at a normal pace 5-6 hours to read 100k words. Doesn't Lit post hundreds of stories every day? Assuming at least 1k words per story...

So, either whoever is doing story approvals spends every waking hour with little to no sleep reading stories, or they themselves make extensive use of AI.

Rejections can be automated without using AI, as explained up above. One suspects (again, exactly two people know that we're aware of) that all but the most egregious machine rejections are at least glanced at by a human editor.

 

[JFoxxo]

You could have written a novella the amount of words you’ve typed on this thread. Not a very good novella admittedly, but still

Personal attacks are uncalled for. Grow up.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Personal attacks are uncalled for. Grow up.

 

[EmilyMiller]

Query, are there ever any that are pending for weeks then get rejected for a reason other than AI? From what I've read here, AI always seems to be the rejection reason after a long delay. This again suggests there's not a 'backlog' problem as such - ones with bad punctuation don't take a couple of weeks to be addressed.

Anecdotally at least, a long delay in publishing / rejecting is associated with AI. At least since they sorted out what the hell was going on in Oct / Nov last year.

Again based on site convos, stories flagged as possibly AI-written get a human review, which appears to be backlogged / deprioritized. Rejection for - say - underage appears to happen quicker.

Maybe Laurel is just sick of all her time being wasted on AI slop. Again from site convos, there is a flood of pure AI slop being submitted.

Very unfortunately some genuine authors (including ones I have beta read for) get false positives. That sucks, but the actual issue is the morons submitting AI slop in the first place. Without that, no problem.

 

[StillStunned]

You're saying that as if working on the story to get it to pass the AI filter isn't a way of improving your craft in the first place. But that's a false dichotomy.

If a story is rejected for AI, it's the equivalent of having your homework returned to you with a note from teacher saying "Must try harder."

 

[randomletters42]

Anecdotally at least, a long delay in publishing / rejecting is associated with AI. At least since they sorted out what the hell was going on in Oct / Nov last year.

Again based on site convos, stories flagged as possibly AI-written get a human review, which appears to be backlogged / deprioritized. Rejection for - say - underage appears to happen quicker.

Maybe Laurel is just sick of all her time being wasted on AI slop. Again from site convos, there is a flood of pure AI slop being submitted.

Very unfortunately some genuine authors (including ones I have beta read for) get false positives. That sucks, but the actual issue is the morons submitting AI slop in the first place. Without that, no problem.

Having an early rejection for "obviously ai or low quality" done by ai is not a bad thing. But a single person proof reading for an entire site is ridiculous. And llms are not going away, so a better solution is needed. Honestly the site just needs a normal ass "trending" list with a decent algorithm.