3 ms·
>Public shaming and rejection are probably the best way to teach That's a wild stance. If you don't like what someone else made - AI assisted or not - you can
by Havoc 2mo ago
>Public shaming and rejection are probably the best way to teach
That's a wild stance. If you don't like what someone else made - AI assisted or not - you can just move on and not purposefully set out to publicly ruin them...
- j_maffe 2mo agoIt's good as a community to communicate what we prefer to read. At least that way the author knows why they're getting the cold shoulder.
- cognitiveinline 2mo agoWhy ruin it for the large community who didnt notice it or mind it, and actually like it? Give cold shoulder by literally walking away. Yelling "SLOP SLOP SLOP" is opposite of cold shoulder, no?
- tokioyoyo 2mo agoI'm fairly AI-pilled, as the cool kids say. But it would be fair for any AI-generated work to be labelled as such. The problem is, vast majority isn't doing it, because they know what the perception is like. The question is, should we spend the same amount of time evaluating AI-gen work as non-AI-gen work. I would say no. In my opinion, AI-gen work should be evaluated by other AIs. Goes back to the whole "if you didn't put effort into creation, why should I put effort into evaluation" thing. Obviously it's not an all-or-nothing thing. But you get my point.