upvote
You are exactly right! People do not find the writing obnoxious, they are backwards technophobes getting brought down by their superstitions.
reply
No? One affects the actual text and the other doesn’t.
reply
AI assisted is a stretch. And that analogy isn't even close to being relevant
reply
This analogy makes absolutely no sense.
reply
Rather interesting than clanker slop defenders downplay the clanker aspect and highlight the human by calling it "ai-assisted", which defeats their entire point.

I hope you do some introspection and start consciously recognizing that the human input and the clanker slop is just debasing it.

reply
Not just that, I think a lot of people are going to waste their time losing the battle (and make no mistake, they will lose) fighting against AI writing without ever asking themselves what makes writing good in the first place.

There’s good AI writing and bad organic writing. But it’s easier to point out a few LLM-isms than to actually identify the problems with text.

reply
> There's good AI writing

Sure, but the LLM-isms in AI writing are mentally exhausting to see in every way at this point.

The whole point of reading, frankly, is to understand the voice of other people. When you pass that through a distorted filter that makes everyone sound the same... its bad, lossy, frustrating communication

It's also dishonest. When you publish something that is direct output without your wording. Digital catfishing at best.

The only good AI writing is providing the prompt, because the question is way more interesting, and way more constructive to learning than the answer

reply