The article is not calling generative work as a whole “turds” but rather it’s being used as a punchy term to describe the tell-tale smells of AI generated conte

The article is not calling generative work as a whole “turds” but rather it’s being used as a punchy term to describe the tell-tale smells of AI generated content. I didn’t get the impression that the author wanted to throw it all out, on the contrary, they are trying to identify and give names specific weirdness precisely because AI is in its infancy and we don’t have names for all this newly AI generated content. The blog post is a little hand-wavey about it, but it’s not meant to be a technical blog post either. This kind of work, as fluffy as it feels, is important to progress new and not fully-formed innovations. If the turds the article points out ends up being a long-term problem for AI generated art, then we have a name for it already. If it gets stomped out once and for all in a future version and people figure out how to make this work in a general sense, then this word “turd” as it describes these artifacts just won’t ever catch on because it won’t be needed.