• Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It is lazy. It will be sloppy, shoddily made garbage.

    The shame is entirely on the one who chose to use the slop machine in the first place.

    • krimson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I laugh at all these desperate “AI good!” articles. Maybe the bubble will pop sooner than I thought.

      • Deflated0ne@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Its gonna suck. Because of course they’re gonna get bailed out. It’s gonna be “too big to fail” all over again.

        Because “national security” or some such nonsense.

    • pheonixdown@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The way I see it is, the usefulness of straight LLM generated text is indirectly proportional to the importance of the work. If someone is asking for text for the sake of text and can’t be convinced otherwise, give 'em slop.

      But I also feel that properly trained & prompted LLM generated text is a force multiplier when combined with revision and fact checking, also varying indirectly proportional with experience and familiarity with the topic.