AI detectors are useless. I don't know how this forum got so infected with Pangram shills, but at this point they need to be banned.

This is an outdated take. It used to be the case, but now detectors have low false positive rates. In other words good precision but not necessarily good recall for detecting AI. So some AI text evades detection, but when it flags something as AI, then it's usually right.

Apart from their own data, a lot of people's anecdotal experience is that its pretty accurate, why would they need to banned for that?

The idea that math will ever be more interesting to kids than making bombs is laughable.

[hello FBI I am not making a bomb]

I think if you can get into the chemistry just a bit, then the math behind the chemistry, it can be a vehicle. I mean it's the same with programming. Why write code (boring, yuck) when you could play video games? Then the kids see code makes video games. Suddenly you have all these programs with kids making Minecraft mods or whatever. But finding each child's "bomb" would be hard for a teacher to do, especially with a common curriculum

Almost no one is, so I don't get your point.

Driving your kids to sports is bad now? Seems like there's a new moral panic every week.

Yep. Last time this happened, during the Afghanistan withdrawal, no one was even fired.

Clearly Americans are ok with it, because that's how they vote. West Virginia didn't raise the age of marriage to 16 until 2023, after years of staunch Republican opposition.

That's not an accurate representation of West Virginia law.

The age of consent for marriage is 18. A marriage license may be given to a person at least 16 years old given consent from their legal guardian and that the person they are marrying is no more than 4 years older than them. [1]

But yes, until 2023 there was no age requirement as long as their legal guardian consented. [2]

Your issue raised here really boils down to whether its okay for parents to determine what is best for their child or if the state needs to decide that.

[1] https://code.wvlegislature.gov/48-2-301/ [2] https://theamm.org/articles/1625-west-virginia-updates-age-r...

> A marriage license may be given to a person at least 16 years old given consent from their legal guardian and that the person they are marrying is no more than 4 years older than them.

Why?

Why not? The age of 18 is an arbitrary cultural norm, I'd ask why the state has to step in and enforce it as opposed to letting the parent or legal guardian decide.

Because society has an interest in preventing girls from being sex trafficked by their parents.

That doesn't track. Sex trafficking is already a crime, preventing the parties involved from getting a marriage license won't stop it.

Also its interesting that you are only concerned when the under 18 individual is a girl.

I literally just said that it's not a crime in several states if the parents do it.

Is your point that America was once okay with child brides and has since changed it's mind? If so I agree.

Who is "America"? California still has no minimum age. Most Republicans still oppose age limits.

"Where Opus 5.5’s advantage is very clear is efficiency."

Not efficiency in writing, clearly.

AI detectors are useless.

I’ll present with as much evidence as you do that I’ve heard pangram is quite reliable. I believe that have studies on their website.

No they didn't.

They really did. And through great irony, such objections are preserved.

https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=3439

"For this invention will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it, because they will not practice their memory. Their trust in writing, produced by external characters which are no part of themselves, will discourage the use of their own memory within them. You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom, for they will read many things without instruction and will therefore seem [275b] to know many things, when they are for the most part ignorant and hard to get along with, since they are not wise, but only appear wise."

That is a fictional objection raised by the Egyptian god Amun to the Egyptian god Thoth, who was supposed by the Egyptians to have invented music and writing, and was supposed by the Greeks to have invented absolutely everything else too, including botany, surveying, and government.

It's also a critique of writing, written by Plato, to impress on us that Socrates was great orator (or arguer) and was better that way. But it's not somebody's reaction to the invention of writing. It's an imagined reaction to the invention of writing.

Wait, you're saying that writing wasn't invented by a guy with an ibis head?

Be wonderful if you approached a translated piece, by first considering the time and culture that produced it. Understanding the intent, rather than quoting it out of place.

This is a political critique, on the rule of law (writing) over attempting to treat things on a case by case basis (philosophy).

Quoting it, without understanding it, is part of that author's complaint.