Timeline for answer to Is attribution required for machine-generated text when posting on Stack Exchange? by animuson
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
Post Revisions
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 18, 2025 at 16:05 | comment | added | Explorer09 | How about clarification like this: The question of whether or not you created the content if you use AI during the process is actually how much human originality it appears in the final result. You must write a substantial portion of the final content in your own style in order to claim it's your own writing. You may have AI generate an initial draft and rewrite a majority of the text to your own wording and claim it's your own. Machine generated output, even when guided by a human prompt, does not prove human originality. | |
| Feb 20, 2024 at 1:17 | comment | added | TheMaster | I think we should compare it to IDEs/linters/beautifiers. It adds spaces/tabs in code/pretty prints it. Sometimes, it even fixes some bugs based on inbuilt syntax trees. "If it wasn't created by you, attribution is always required here." We didn't fix/beautify the code, but we don't exactly attribute the little intelligence shown by the IDE. Why do we need to do for Artificial intelligence? I think the answer needs to focus on that - especially the ratio of work done by us to the work done by a machine in creating the final output. That ratio seems to determine policy here. | |
| Jan 16, 2023 at 1:35 | comment | added | C.S.Cameron | A chisel, pen, paintbrush, typewriter, camera, word processor, computer, spell checker, grammar checker, AI assistant, etc are all just artists' tools. Cameras automated the work of painters. Photography has become an art form in its own right. AI is automating many forms of art, but it is still just an artist's tool. AI does not wake up in the morning saying "I think I will do an illustration this morning and this afternoon I will produce a children's book, tonight I will write a few poems. It takes Human interaction to do such things. | |
| Dec 14, 2022 at 19:12 | comment | added | JonathanReez | @BSMP it was trained on text written by other people but doesn't use any single piece of text directly. Just like every single piece of text written by humans is inspired/based on text that they've previously read/heard. | |
| Dec 14, 2022 at 18:08 | comment | added | BSMP | "In this case the work was created by a machine algorithm..." @JonathanReez The algorithm is still using text that was created by other people. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 22:07 | comment | added | Mad Scientist | I think this might be clearer if you remove the argument in the middle paragraph, it's not really necessary and it can mislead people into thinking copyright matters for this issue, which is one of the major sources of confusion on this topic. The SE rules are really much closer to the academic rules of attribution than anything copyright-related. The law is irrelevant here (or rather anything that breaks the law is handled by a different rule), it only matters that you properly attribute content that is not your own. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:52 | comment | added | JonathanReez | Okay, policy clarified, accepting this answer. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:52 | vote | accept | JonathanReez | ||
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:49 | comment | added | animuson StaffMod | @JonathanReez Our policy is that attribution is required if you didn't create it. That's all. I could frankly care less that it is ownerless, but we would not consider you to be the owner of text generated by such a tool because you did not actually write it. This tool is not comparable to how Word or Google Translate process input, and we're not going to get into a long comment discussion about copyright. Our policy is clear. You didn't write it. It requires attribution. Period. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:43 | comment | added | JonathanReez | @animuson no, the creator of ChatGPT doesn't get credit just like the creator of Word doesn't get credit just because it auto-capitalized and reformatted your text automatically. Google Translate doesn't get credit for translating text. Any fully automated system becomes a generic tool, no different from other tools. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:41 | comment | added | animuson StaffMod | @JonathanReez At best, the person who created the tool could be considered the creator of the content. Telling a computer "create this" does not constitute you creating anything. That would be akin to telling an assistant to go make a cup of coffee and then claiming you made it because you issued the order. If the text was generated and you didn't make substantial edits to make it your own, then it is right to attribute the tool that created it. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:35 | comment | added | JonathanReez | And you did create the work! You've entered a prompt into ChatGPT, which spit out an answer. You've analyzed it to see if it looks reasonable, added a few edits, then posted it on SE. It's a tool that you've used to create an original work. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:34 | comment | added | JonathanReez | No, a public domain work has expired copyright or a waived copyright. Otherwise it would normally be subject to copyright. For this reason you don't need to provide attribution to "mother nature" if you create a pattern based off a butterfly's wing - the butterfly's patterns are not copyrightable in the first place. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:25 | comment | added | animuson StaffMod | @JonathanReez What's your point? By definition, a public domain work is not eligible for copyright and thus also not possible to steal. My point is that whether something is copyrighted is not really relevant to us. What matters is if you created it. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:22 | comment | added | JonathanReez | No, public domain works are different because there's still an actual person somewhere who did the work in question (even if they're long dead). In this case the work was created by a machine algorithm and it's not possible to "steal" it. | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:14 | history | answered | animusonStaffMod | CC BY-SA 4.0 |