Live data from Hacker News

Slop Cop

awnist.com

51–60 of 169 posts

Re: Slop Cop

#51

This is a genuinely useful tool with a shitty self-sabotaging name.

And it's unnecessarily rude. Grammarly and Hemingway can identify the same sort of issues without "you are a stupid robot" vibes.

... the problem is it is rude to LLMs? i think they can handle it.

Re: Slop Cop

#52

Wow! Did you know that Abraham Lincoln let AI write the Gettysburg Address? 17 patterns identified out of only 305 words. I don't know why I ever let him get the ad revenue.

[deleted]

Re: Slop Cop

#53
If prompted appropriately, LLMs can write prose that mirrors nearly any style you ask for. Not sure what the big hubbub about "slop" is. Honestly it's annoying.

Re: Slop Cop

#54
post #31

Like the original Grammarly, I think this can be useful for business writing because these tools help you get to the point. Many students are rewarded for using flowery language in school essays, but if you're composing an email or writing a design doc, just optimize for reading time and clarity. But for general use, I think this is misguided. The problem with LLM output is not that it's using em dashes or words such…

> "I had a shower thought and I asked a chatbot to write five pages of text about it." I don't need prettier words, I need there to be fewer of them? Always judge an author by the length of their text. Decades of insights barely condensed into 200 pages? Great! Hours of thought expanded into 200 pages? Very bad. Same length of text but lands very differently. Same is true for emails, tweets, videos, and even just tal…

So, not in fact the length of the text, which is constant at 200 pages.

Re: Slop Cop

#55
post #42

It seems relevant that a lot of these things were fairly notorious clichés even before LLMs, which just intensified the phenomenon. They were what people tended to do who wanted to sound smart and sophisticated but didn't have a developed voice or anything in particular to say. Indeed, I'm fairly sure this is why LLMs sound like this.

A lot of these things were well-known clichés already before LLMs, used by people who wanted to sound sophisticated but weren't articulate or didn't have anything to say. That's why LLMs sound like that.

Artificial intelligence predates computers.

Re: Slop Cop

#56
I love how you can tell something was generated because it comes out clear and using many of the important writing fundamentals we were all taught.

Re: Slop Cop

#57
Being cautious and an autistic mathematician also I am prone to heavy qualification. This causes very large blocks of my writing to be highlighted as "Hedge Stack" which isn't really helpful. Lots of Overused Intensifier and Triple Construction instances also, but those are usually words or phrases, not several paragraphs together as with Hedge Stack.

Seems like a sad situation, but I'm not going to start changing my communication style to avoid sounding like an LLM. At least not yet.

Re: Slop Cop

#58

Like the original Grammarly, I think this can be useful for business writing because these tools help you get to the point. Many students are rewarded for using flowery language in school essays, but if you're composing an email or writing a design doc, just optimize for reading time and clarity. But for general use, I think this is misguided. The problem with LLM output is not that it's using em dashes or words such…

>The problem is not X. It's Y.

Your writing style, if not your thoughts, have already been infected by LLM prose.

Re: Slop Cop

#59

Like the original Grammarly, I think this can be useful for business writing because these tools help you get to the point. Many students are rewarded for using flowery language in school essays, but if you're composing an email or writing a design doc, just optimize for reading time and clarity. But for general use, I think this is misguided. The problem with LLM output is not that it's using em dashes or words such…

>The problem is not X. It's Y. Your writing style, if not your thoughts, have already been infected by LLM prose.

Nonsense. It's a common construction that LLMs didn't exactly invent. I don't think their usage evokes LLM writing at all (not short and punchy enough).

Re: Slop Cop

#60

Like the original Grammarly, I think this can be useful for business writing because these tools help you get to the point. Many students are rewarded for using flowery language in school essays, but if you're composing an email or writing a design doc, just optimize for reading time and clarity. But for general use, I think this is misguided. The problem with LLM output is not that it's using em dashes or words such…

>The problem is not X. It's Y. Your writing style, if not your thoughts, have already been infected by LLM prose.

No. I've been using that construct long before LLMs and I don't think there's anything wrong with it. It allows you to succinctly state the position you're disagreeing with before putting forward another hypothesis. LLMs overuse it for needless emphasis, with the negative example usually reduced to a single word.
Post reply on HN