3 ms·
I'm very sorry to say it, but even reading LLM-slop is less tiresome, then reading yet another anti-AI slop article. It's a pretty low bar. I could find 10 ant
by vova_hn2 23d ago
I'm very sorry to say it, but even reading LLM-slop is less tiresome, then reading yet another anti-AI slop article. It's a pretty low bar.
I could find 10 anti-AI posts on HN and they all will contain points from a very narrow pool of anti-AI takes. I mean, how many more times do you need to repeat them?
> stochastic algorithms trained to produce tons of "average," non-human content
As we can see, humans are also quite capable of producing "average" content. And by "average" I don't mean "average quality", I mean "average opinion of a certain group".
- encyclopedism 23d ago> I mean, how many more times do you need to repeat them? Exactly! It's not as if humans are special (though LLM's certainly are). Humans, they've been the same for thousands of years, same old stories (there's like only 7 archetypal stories they've ever come up with). Same old poems, love this, romance that blah blah blah! We certainly don't need yet another anti-AI article, same as all the others. Though as it's written entirely by a human who must have thought about every word, certainly poles apart from an LLM generated article one, I'll give him credit for making the effort.
- hardbass 22d agoI knew a lot of people have various blind spots, but I had never expected such a massive wave of dualist thinking in practitioners of an engineering/science field.
- truro 23d ago"...ven reading LLM-slop is less tiresome, then reading..." You meant "than."
- vova_hn2 23d agoKinda ironic, that a "stochastic parrot" from TFA probably wouldn't make such mistake :)
- archagon 23d agoSo why are you commenting on it?
- vova_hn2 23d agoBecause every time I hope to see something new and interesting, and every time I'm disappointed.