Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

AZJonnie

(3,305 posts)
7. I mean it literally sourced from this very thread
Fri Feb 13, 2026, 03:52 PM
Friday

Claude's citation for the below text IS the thread that you and I are talking in right now

Verbatim paste:

Why there are “Elias” vs “Marla” versions
When short fiction circulates online, people:
Change character names (Elias → Marla, etc.) to personalize or “improve” it for their own post.
​Edit details like dates or the specific time‑travel instructions to fit a different prompt, meme, or context (e.g., Reddit writing prompts, AI demos).
​Let AIs regenerate the same idea, which preserves some lines but changes surface details like names and wording.

Because there’s no canonical publication to anchor it, each repost or AI regeneration becomes “a version,” and they drift apart over time.

Is there an “original” version?
With no traceable first publication (e.g., an early dated story on a known author’s site, magazine, or book), there is no reliably verifiable “original” here. What you’re seeing is a meme‑like text: one early version got popular, and later copies, edits, and AI paraphrases created the Elias, Marla, and altered‑directions variants, none of which can be definitively proven to be the first.​

In short: both versions are internet variants of the same micro‑fiction idea, not differing print editions of a book passage, and the differences come from casual edits and AI/reader rewrites rather than from an author‑sanctioned original.






Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Thx to you & Goonch SheltieLover Friday #1
Lol for fun I asked an AI the reason for the discrepancy and gave it the passage from your post AZJonnie Friday #2
Not sure what you mean. It quoted one of my replies in that Science Fiction thread, or it quoted highplainsdem Friday #4
I mean it literally sourced from this very thread AZJonnie Friday #7
Claude is clueless. There is an actual story. I posted links about it in the earlier thread I linked to. There highplainsdem Friday #9
It's not surprising that it got confused, this entire discussion is extremely circular AZJonnie Friday #13
I would've expected any bot to at least follow the links in both threads, which would have shown that highplainsdem Friday #15
Claude would have seen this bit, in Goonch's follow-up, which said this: AZJonnie Friday #17
Interesting seeing you try to defend Claude's inane answer, when this thread links to the older thread highplainsdem 10 min ago #19
And, The Chatbot Is Still Wrong ProfessorGAC Friday #3
+1. It's patent nonsense dalton99a Friday #5
I don't know about that one, Professor :) AZJonnie Friday #8
I'm Going To Say No ProfessorGAC Friday #11
Obviously I know I don't know nearly as much on this topic as you do, so I generally defer, Sir :) AZJonnie Friday #14
Pretty Much ProfessorGAC Friday #16
These tools don't just fabricate fiction. They fabricate citations in law and science pieces. RockRaven Friday #6
Yes. I mentioned that in the earlier thread I linked to. I've posted lots of warnings here over the last few years highplainsdem Friday #10
+1. AI is essentially a smooth-talking buzzword-spewing bullshitter with an unlimited capacity for plagiarism dalton99a Friday #12
Exactly. highplainsdem 20 min ago #18
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»You've probably heard tha...»Reply #7