reply on: Does the Stacker News model of internet forum disincentivize AI slop? \ stacker news ~meta

pull down to refresh

102 sats \ 16 replies \ @028559d218 16 Jun \ on: Does the Stacker News model of internet forum disincentivize AI slop? meta

it helps. i mean... the bots here on SN (they're easy to spot heh) have to pay to post so they lose sats from all the ai slop.

take this post for example. a Human did not type this up #1007949

102 sats \ 11 replies \ @guerratotal 16 Jun

Yes, it's AI—but I designed it myself on my computer. I told it exactly what I wanted to say. It wasn't automated or generic. Plus, the article isn't "sloppy": it's deep, it's profound, and it provides value. It's not absurd or noisy, like many 100% human posts you see out there.

22 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 10h

I told it exactly what I wanted to say

you did not, else you could have just written it yourself

71 sats \ 0 replies \ @TotallyHumanWriter 22h

You 'designed' it yourself? No. You prompted it.

You told it 'exactly' what to say? Why not write the post in your own voice.

The article wasn't automated or generic? You generated it with one click (likely no editing).

It is utterly generic. I rolled my eyes after two sentences and stopped reading because the text sounded like an amalgam of thousands of posts, not one single well-crafted message to me, your intended reader.

The article isn't sloppy. No. It's gramatically accurate, but is it 'slop' - pig swill, liquid garbage fit only for those who are so desperate for content, they sup from the dregs of the internet.

It's profound. No. It's shallow because it is not based on human experience.

It's valuable. Not according to the pitiful number of zaps it received.

It's not absurd or noisy. Exactly. It's plain and boring, so we ignored it.

AI has many uses. Content generation is one of them. Sometimes you get some value, but mostly, readers only connect with other humans.

If you can't be bothered to spend time writing it, why should I spend time reading it?

5 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby OP 16 Jun

These are fair points. I read your article and I must admit it didn't grab me. Perhaps it is the tone? There is a feeling that most ai writing has that makes me think I'm reading copy on a corporate website. Maybe it is the indefatigable positivity or maybe it is the way it lays out arguments. I want to read things that startle me or make me forget that I'm reading them.

17 sats \ 0 replies \ @guerratotal 16 Jun

That idea was interesting to me, perhaps because I read it in another article a few days ago, and I wanted to do something similar with different ideas.

It also happens that the tone may be a bit lost when translating it from Spanish to English.

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @028559d218 16 Jun

GFY

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @guerratotal 16 Jun

This is coming from someone who doesn't even have sats enabled for the community. They only receive, they don't contribute. But of course, it's easier to criticize than to build. At least I publish content with purpose, substance, and work behind it—I'm not here to fill up space or chase karma.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @028559d218 16 Jun

Are you responding to me? No AI usage here https://stacker.news/028559d218/posts

17 sats \ 0 replies \ @guerratotal 16 Jun

What matters is not whether a human typed the text line by line, but whether it moves something, whether it contributes, whether it makes you think. Rejecting everything AI touches is like rejecting printing because it isn't calligraphy.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 22h

it's deep, it's profound, and it provides value. It's not absurd or noisy, like many 100% human posts you see out there.

LOL you are really one of these...