271–275 of 275 posts
[flagged]
In the spirit you propose—Did you verify this? I notice that your comment history is all rapid-fire three-paragraph LLM responses. You do appear knowledgeable and respond quickly, but I've just dumped 10 minutes of my life into your attention in order to verify, parse, and filter through your responses. I can't tell whether you're a person who thought about something. Therefore, I can't tell whether, for example, htt…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It shouldn't matter as long as it addresses your ask But it doesn't? I'm more than capable of using Google and chatgpt myself. If I was looking for a machine generated answer to my question I would have already found it myself and never made the post in the first place. If I went to the effort of posting the question, it means that either the slop answer is not sufficient for some reason or that I want to hear from…
I think it is reasonable, yes, but I don’t think it’s ever been reasonable to expect reasonableness on the internet. We have a difficult enough time showing each other decency.
This is a disingenuous answer. You don't truly believe this. How do I know? Because you're having this conversation here and not with ChatGPT. So you do think the internet is reasonable enough to engage in this conversation.
Also, Sturgeon's Law applies. "The Internet" is as reasonable as humans are. Of course 90% of it is going to be garbage, but that's no reason to discard the other 10%.
I know you're playing devil's advocate. I wish people stopped doing this, and instead acknowledged human connection is worthwhile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then why even have this discussion in the first place? You weren’t expecting any reasonable responses to it, after all.
Do you only do stuff where you expect the outcome to be good? Perhaps they did it for the off chance of a good response.
I think they are playing devil's advocate in the most irritating way. Good things, and good venues, are worth preserving against enshittification.
Let's not blandly accept this. Fight against it, even if it's a losing battle.
"It was always like this" is false, anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We can tell by your fury that you’re a slop poster. I don’t want a random person’s use of an AI to be slopped at me. I don’t know what they asked it, a lot of the words are made up, and I have to go through the effort of decoding it. If I wanted an AI answer I would ask an AI. AI slop is made up. It’s like handing me a paste of google search results. It’s creating work for me.
I agree with you. No one wants this. But the internet has had slop long before AI. It's in the same class as clickbait. AI just made it worse and given the slop a distinct flavor. You can be furious about this if you want, but to me this seems like a waste of energy, which is the whole point of my original post. We need better tools for managing our attention. Perhaps the effort of decoding it can be offloaded to AI.…
Understatement of the century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everybody wants to use LLMs to produce things and absolutely nobody wants to consume the things that LLMs produce and this is the fundamental reason this is all going to collapse unless we find a way for producers to pay consumers to consume their LLM output.
Gotta disagree. I've found several great new YouTube channels that clearly use ai for everything but the script writing. I assume it's an enthusiastic and smart niche expert who lacks the charisma to make videos in addition to doing the research. In very glad ai is filling in those people's weak spots.
But why are you glad? There's no intrinsic right to be popular on YouTube, or to be successful. There's also no lack of YouTubers making interesting videos. Why not let a "natural selection" of sorts weed out these people who lack the charisma or whatever to make videos without AI?