> AI prose is better than the average human There's no objective measurement of “better”, which in itself refutes your argument, but I personally feels AI pros

> AI prose is better than the average human There's no objective measurement of “better”, which in itself refutes your argument, but I personally feels AI prose to be very annoying for mostly two reasons: - it's the same everywhere. People could use AI to write in different styles by prompting and through few-shots learning, but they don't and as a result every AI generated prose looks like something I've already read. Its junk prose the same way way Mac Donalds is junk food. - if someone doesn't make the effort of writing or even customizing the AI output, then what I'm reading is a low effort post and it's highly unlikely that I'm going to learn anything in the process. As a result as soon as I realize that I'm reading AI slop, I feel the immediate disappointment of having committed some time to reading something that wasn't worth my time. > Historians will look back at all the silly dead humans in the past that icked and yucked about AI. Like we look at the silly dead humans in the past who fought back against opium, cigarettes and leaded gasoline?