Bad news: clankers occasionally throw in a typo or two as well. Can’t tell you whether that’s intentional or because the (human made) training data includes typos but there it is.
My observations: it can be for both reasons, though I think most modern ones will be better than the human average unless you ask them to add typos. Which they can do, but they have a hard time being consistent with it, especially if they’re trying to pose as the same person over multiple responses (e.g. a reddit or fedi bot), they won’t have the same type and frequency of typos that a human would have consistently across posts.
Bad news: clankers occasionally throw in a typo or two as well. Can’t tell you whether that’s intentional or because the (human made) training data includes typos but there it is.
My observations: it can be for both reasons, though I think most modern ones will be better than the human average unless you ask them to add typos. Which they can do, but they have a hard time being consistent with it, especially if they’re trying to pose as the same person over multiple responses (e.g. a reddit or fedi bot), they won’t have the same type and frequency of typos that a human would have consistently across posts.
I understand what you’re saying, but I’ve never heard that use of the word “clankers” before. Is this a thing now?
It’s a slur, basically, for AI that pretends to speak like a human. In the Star Wars franchise, people who don’t like droids call them that.