12 ms·
> Argue with the content I am. It sounds like it was written by an LLM. That's synonymous with uninteresting and derivative. BTW, likening not wanting to read
by nearlyepic 1mo ago
> Argue with the content
I am. It sounds like it was written by an LLM. That's synonymous with uninteresting and derivative.
BTW, likening not wanting to read LLM output to racism is possibly one of the funniest things I've ever seen on this website. Thank you.
- juleiie 1mo agoIt’s suprisingly similar. In each case you shouldn’t care who written the text. Only judge it as is. Whether black hands typed the words or binary hands. It just doesn’t matter.
- nearlyepic 1mo agoIt does, actually - people are alive and computers aren’t. In case you forgot.
- juleiie 1mo agoDo yourself a favor and conduct a simple thought experiment that will destroy any possible argument. We are in year 2030, four years from now. LLM or similar architecture, produces output indistinguishable from a human. It can do this already if you are good at prompting to be honest. So you read an article and you have no way of knowing whether it is made by an LLM or whether it is made by a human. Do you cease to read anything released post 2026 out of sheer stubbornness/stupidity or do you keep reading articles? Because if you keep reading then you have no way of knowing, you already have read hundreds of AI generated articles without realizing. The survivorship bias has presented you with an article that is easy to see how it was made using AI. Now the plot twist is that it is already the 2030 for simple article generation and anyone can produce short text indistinguishable from 100% manual output. Hell it was possible a year ago no problem. So you focusing on whether the AI was used or maybe it was generated fully using some smaller local private model probably, is quite moot. It doesn't matter. It is still a bad article.
- nearlyepic 1mo agoThought experiments are for nerds.
- DonHopkins 1mo agoFYI, you're arguing with a petty psychopath who will threaten your life when she inevidibly loses an argument because the facts and evidence are not on her side.
- nearlyepic 1mo agoArguing is being generous, lol.
- DonHopkins 1mo agoIronically, if only she would use an LLM to write her comments, then at least they wouldn't contain as many blatant factual errors and tell-tale death threats that prove she's a human.