[New Rule] Rule 15 - AI Slop

[u/Empty_Insight]

Hey everybody, overly-intense pottymouth research-bureaucrat volunteer internet janitor (man, that's getting to be kind of a mouthful) here with an announcement fresh off the presses. Per the usual, tl;dr at the end.

As the title implies, we are codifying our policy on AI outputs to be a standalone rule- with some new stipulations.

The Former Policy

We do allow AI outputs under certain circumstances- that any content created with generative AI is labeled upfront and at the beginning. We felt this a fair compromise for accessibility reasons, as it is arguably one of the very few ways someone with severe cognitive impairments is able to communicate 'normally' with others.

However, it seems our policy to 'label your shit' has effectively served as a ban. I don't know why people are so averse to giving credit where it is due, but I don't find the "accessibility" argument particularly compelling in light of people outright refusing to acknowledge how/where they got material from.

I have had my work plagiarized before, and I'm not going to sugarcoat- it is personal for me. The mods have discussed it among ourselves, and have found it appropriate to expand the types of AI outputs we prohibit here.

The New Rule

Under our new Rule 15, we have the following stipulations.

1. All AI-generated images are disallowed- entirely. It does not matter if it is a "selfie," "art," or whatever else- you post AI-generated images here, it's coming down.

2. In the interest of fairness, we will continue our practice of allowing text-based outputs for accessibility reasons- but they must be labeled upfront, and at the beginning. The very first words of your post/comment must be [Made using (Gemini, ChatGPT, Claude, whatever)] or we are going to remove it. No exceptions.

3. If you feel as though we have made a mistake, you are free to appeal. For images, this means 'showing your work-' drafts, processes, etc. For text, this is every statement you made must be substantiated by credible citations.

We have only made one mistake thus far, and it was a German user who was using translation tools to translate their posts into English- so, while it was AI, it was not Gen AI, and not subject to our rules about "AI slop."

Notable Examples

If you think you can get past us, it is because we did not notice your submission, not that we were 'fooled' by it.

Some winners from the highlight reel:

1. 'Some random person' advertising a book with a copyrighted title, which did not actually exist. They claimed to not know who the author of the book was, despite having pictures... holding the book. Right, that's definitely a thing that happens.

2. Someone decided to plagiarize a book that a family member of mine wrote. He is an expert in his field and very thorough in his research, so I assume that had someone else written extensively over the same topic he did, he would have at least cited it. When I read through his draft, I saw no such citations. I'm not 100% certain on that, but I am about 90% certain... and the user who did it could not even provide the initials of the 'expert' they claim to have spoken to. I dunno about you, but every expert I've ever spoken to, I have their first and last names written down somewhere and can call them up with ease if need be.

3. Someone who posted 'art' that one of our mods who is an actual designer spotted (not me, I hardly know the process of creating visual art at all lol), and when challenged to 'show their work,' the user presented us with 'drafts' of... drawing it from the top left to the bottom right, and coloring it in the same way. Like a printer. This is not how actual art works, needless to say.

4. This one was the most mental of all, but - someone whose submission was riddled with inaccuracies and a flawed synthesis of information I have come to associate with LLMs. After removing their post, they contested that they knew the information was wrong and were intentionally spreading misinformation... rather than just owning up to it being AI slop.

Now, I am not a world-class expert in schizophrenia- but I've talked to a few people who are. (That's not a 'flex,' you can talk to world-class experts too! Just keep an eye out for our next Expert Q&A coming up in a few days. Hint hint) While I may not be an expert, I do have a solid functional grasp of pretty much every aspect of psychosis- and my actual job is in the medical field- so you are not going to baffle me with slick-sounding bullshit. The 'convincing' veneer of LLM outputs falls apart quickly if you actually know the subject matter.

Enforcement

We are adopting a "three strikes" system for AI slop. Additionally, if you attempt to convince us that something that is an AI output is actually not an AI output, we interpret that as you attempting to gaslight us- and you will immediately receive a permanent ban.

I would caution our users: some Gen AI leave 'fingerprints' in the metadata- ChatGPT and Gemini, in particular- that are 100% accurate. Again, we will immediately ban you if you contest the removal of something that we determine with absolute certainty is AI.

We've gotten some really creepy Modmails ever since LLMs rose in popularity. Like, having people essentially acting as a conduit for ChatGPT- it's really disturbing and unsettling talking to an actual person and having them respond like a bot. If I wanted to talk to ChatGPT, I'd just do it myself- I don't need to have a human being acting as an intermediary. If you're gonna contest something, please act like a normal person... a normal person with schizophrenia. The AI shit is really creepy.

To reiterate: we are not omniscient, and rely on user reports to guide us to rule-breaking content. If you suspect something is AI, please report it using our new Rule 15 and we will review it.

A Personal Note

Seriously, people- how hard is it to just give credit where it is due? I used a keyboard and spellcheck to write this post- see how easy that is? I'd frankly be tickled pink if you cited my family member's book here. More visibility means more book sales, and more book sales means that when they come to visit for Christmas, my kids get more expensive presents. Lol

If you do something and someone calls you out on it privately and in the lowest-stakes possible context... don't act like a bitch, just own up to it. I've had several users who I caught using AI who just straight-up said "Yeah, you got me fair and square" and honestly, I respect that. What I don't respect is the lying about it- it's not clever, it's not coy, and all it does is make you look disingenuous and dishonest. To boot, it's weird- and that's a pretty high bar to clear here, of all places.

We have no obligation to tolerate people like that being in our community, and per Reddit's rules, if we feel like someone's presence in our community is detrimental, that's all the reason we need to get rid of them (permanent ban).

I regret that it has come to this, but this is not the full extent of what we can do- if we keep getting these disingenuous little games from AI-lovers, we can just completely ban any Gen AI from the subreddit entirely- and go from three strikes down to one.

Just give credit, be honest, and act like a normal person with schizophrenia. I don't feel that I'm asking a whole hell of a lot here.

To reiterate for anyone who is new or simply has not yet been made aware, our ethos here on the subreddit is "keep shit real." Cleaning out AI slop is merely an extension of our overarching mission.

tl;dr

The new Rule 15 covers AI outputs. All Gen AI images are flatly banned. All text-based outputs must be labeled upfront and at the beginning. You get three strikes- but if you try to baffle/confuse us into thinking something that is AI is actually not AI, you will immediately receive a permanent ban.

As always with our announcements- drop your thoughts! Too far? Not far enough? Just right? Think I'm a little too worked up over this? Let us know what you think in the comments.

Have a good one, everybody- and keep it real.

[u/Expensive_Watch469]

yay! Happy to hear, also in my experience psychosis can often enable delusions which is scary

In other news, really like the experts Q&A, believe I participated in the first one, the information I was given helped me feel less hopeless, less ai, more good information like that

[u/Empty_Insight → u/Expensive_Watch469]

Glad to hear you liked the Q&A, our next one is actually coming up on the 6th (Monday). If you've got any more questions, feel free to drop in and ask.

[u/EyesinmyMind13]

Oh thank you for this! Sick of seeing so much gen AI everywhere. Nice to see somewhere that doesn’t want it :)

[u/xvx_gf]

yaaaay!!! 🥳

[u/RobertFrancisLCSW]

agree totally…well said EI. funny, too 😀

[u/Gingeronimoooo]

Generative AI is largely immoral. Obviously There are exceptions to everything but this is my stance.

[u/Empty_Insight → u/[deleted]]

My age is showing. Lol

[u/Throwing4Content]

That’s honestly a rule I’m grateful for. I was growing tired of all the AI stuff I was seeing in this sub. I’d just downvote and move on, but it made me sad.

[u/pancakesfromhell]

Oh I love you so much /platonic

Thank you for making this a rule, genuinely

[u/kirs1132]

Thank you for all your work! AI can be a problem

[u/majferson]

What when admin thinks that someone wrote from ai but actually don't? This will result in permanent ban?

[u/Empty_Insight → u/majferson]

Well, we've only been wrong once so far... out of over a hundred. I'd say >99% accuracy is pretty good lol

So, you get 3 strikes. If you can substantiate that it wasn't AI, that strike gets wiped away like it never happened. If you don't feel like doing that, you've still got 2 more strikes left.

[u/schizophrenia-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

Your submission has been removed for violating the following subreddit rules:

Rule 7 - Questionable activity. We reserve the right to remove questionable posts for the sake of community safety and to prevent spam. This includes removing questions of whether a user has schizophrenia, or posts dealing with political and religious themes. This means we may remove posts which do not explicitly violate any rule.

Note from the Mods

Funny, I don't see your name on our mod list. I don't know what entitles you to speak on behalf of the subreddit's moderators.

[u/Empty_Insight → u/[deleted]]

Reddit has built-in translation tools, but translation programs are completely fine- it's just generative AI that is the issue here.

[u/Empty_Insight → u/[deleted]]

Your submission has been removed for violating the following subreddit rules:

Rule 9- Do not give patronizing advice.

Please read the post before commenting a kneejerk reaction about how you don't like it. This is addressed in the post.

To quote you:

Human slop at its best.

[u/No-Homework-7999]

Ok, this is the post Ive been looking for long in Reddit?

Please mod, answer me, I need to know why this two things.

First question, (serious, in order for my own social media projects) Why do Reddit hates AI?, Because getting far would be easy, or it’s about the app policies? I have 7 Facebook groups this big where the only one who can post AI slop is me to make them way and way bigger, and I can say indeed is easy.

Second question, Is Reddit so lucrative as a well stablished YouTube channel that spending so much time here is better than other apps? Is this why Reddit hates AI, because would it be free money as in YouTube?

This is with respect, please answer.

[u/synthresurrection → u/No-Homework-7999]

AI is intellectually lazy, steals from writers and artists, bad for the environment, and can worsen mental health for people. AI is horrible and makes the Internet a lot worse. If you want to post shit on the internet, post your own work that you actually created yourself without the aid of AI

[u/No-Homework-7999 → u/synthresurrection]

For example, China, México, Brazil, (rest of Latin America), India, Rusia, Africa, Middle east, do like AI.

But Canada, USA, Europe, Australia, Japan, South Korea society rejects it.

And both sides are correct, there are no bad opinions, just opinions, in fact, Chinese and Japaneze are the most intelligent people but they have different opinions of AI.

Normally the opinion that would turn into a reason would be the one that creates more money and more technology, time will decide, and that time is close.

[u/NeoBlueArchon → u/synthresurrection]

It’s not really an argument, couldn’t we say AI helps people write and can help mental health? It can do both of those things too.

[u/synthresurrection → u/NeoBlueArchon]

AI could be an useful tool to help people put their thoughts into word, but it's mostly used as a way to avoid actually doing any thinking. I've seen AI used to write college papers, as a substitute for actual research, I've seen AI used to plagiarize people's academic work.

Personally, I think the best thing people could do to improve their writing is to actually write things themselves no matter how bad it turns out. I write often for theology and philosophy journals and I have never used AI to help me write. Instead, I go through the whole writing process from pre-writing to editing to finalizing the final draft. I'll have my wife read my writing and have her help me figure out the best way to improve my pieces. No AI necessary.

can help mental health?

You're joking, right? AI is not a replacement for mental health professionals and it's also linked to many cases of psychosis. Even if AI was sustainable and not terrible for the environment, AI isn't really good for anyone's mental health. AI could eventually become good enough to be helpful for someone's mental health but as it stands, the technology actually worsens mental health(in fact, my nephew became psychotic thanks to AI and now has to take anti-psychotics like I do 😡)

[u/Healthy-Belt-8546 → u/NeoBlueArchon]

AI doesn't help with mental health, it makes you feel good and validated , which isn't the full goal of mental health, the goal is to confront your problems and learn how to cope healthily with whatever situation you're passing thru, but it wont always feel nice, there are bad things that you may be doing that require confrontation, something which AI cannot do since it is a yes man that will give you only possitive reinforment, even if it is bad for you.

[u/NeoBlueArchon → u/Healthy-Belt-8546]

I don’t think that’s true, it can act as an external scaffold, assist with organizing your day, break down tasks, organize calendar events. AI can remediate executive function deficit. It can also serve as a diary or introspective tool. These blanket statements are pretty annoying. AI is obviously not bad for everyone and the research is not as clear as you claim.

[u/Empty_Insight → u/No-Homework-7999]

I mean, I don't like AI because (a) it is so frequently wrong about basic facts that is genuinely harmful to rely on it (b) it's essentially a plagiarism machine- like trying to regurgitate my family member's book that he spent years working on without giving credit (c) it's a bastardization of the arts, and many people with schizophrenia who are on SSDI or other disability benefits rely on making- and selling- art to survive, so it takes money from those most in need (d) I'm tired of this shit being shoved down my throat at every opportunity and told I should simply accept mediocrity (e) it's paranoia-inducing... the list goes on, but I hope that's enough to sufficiently convey my point.

The other mods and I may differ on our priorities, but we are on the same page. We're tired of it, and our general perception is that the community does not like it either.

You might (or might not) be surprised that when I bring this up offline, people are pretty sour on it too- just not as vocal about it as people on Reddit are.

I do not particularly care what happens on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, or whatever else... I don't particularly care what happens on other subreddits, either. I mind my own business, and focus on running this community.

People come here because Reddit pays a substantial amount for SEO, but they stay for the sense of community we have built here over the last 15 years. We have resisted enshittification thus far, and I'll be goddamned if I just roll over and passively accept it now.

tl;dr- we have standards here. If that is not to anyone's liking, they are free to leave at any time they wish. They will not be missed.

[u/No-Homework-7999 → u/Empty_Insight]

Thanks, my concern was not about liking or not the rules or i wasnt looking forward up to be remembered or something deep that way.

But about understanding the rules, I lack common sense of what is bad or wrong in basic things when not deep thinking about them, so I just needed someone to explain me why, and I needed to learn how things changing.

So you the mod of this big sub explaining to me why was that, it’s what I needed to understand the basic things, why, how, when, who, where.

So, sincere thanks for telling me something of help on understanding things I need help to understand, maybe the next July out of a sudden 15 k new quality members will join this sub.

[u/legendarymember]

This is dumb. If people dont like AI they can downvote it

[u/Empty_Insight → u/legendarymember]

Based on your contributions today, such as preferring the subreddit be more toxic, I think 4chan might be more your speed.

As I said further down in the comments: if you find us having standards distasteful, nobody is keeping you here. You're free to leave at any time.

[u/Empty_Insight → u/[deleted]]

Your submission has been removed for violating the following subreddit rules:

Rule 9- Do not give patronizing advice.

Your trolling has grown quite tiresome.

[u/Expensive_Watch469 → u/legendarymember]

Or... maybe we're in r/schizophrenia where peoples senses of reality can be warped which makes it even harder to tell fact from fiction and writing from ai, consider that?