The way I think about this is a bit more like “somehow, we need immune systems against arbitrary nuanced persuasion.” Which is for sure a very hard problem, but, I don’t think simple tricks of “check if LLM influenced” will turn out to be that useful.
I think at the very least you want more metadata about how the AI was used.
Something like “somehow automatically track metadata about how documents came to be and include it”, the way you might try to do with photography. (I guess the metaphor here is more like “have text documents automatically include info about what text entered via “paste” instead of by typing manually?”)
The way I think about this is a bit more like “somehow, we need immune systems against arbitrary nuanced persuasion.” Which is for sure a very hard problem, but, I don’t think simple tricks of “check if LLM influenced” will turn out to be that useful.
It seems like a good start—for instance, it would be potentially useful data.
I think at the very least you want more metadata about how the AI was used.
Something like “somehow automatically track metadata about how documents came to be and include it”, the way you might try to do with photography. (I guess the metaphor here is more like “have text documents automatically include info about what text entered via “paste” instead of by typing manually?”)