sorry, I thought it might be interesting to see the backstory of the company. I also clearly marked that part of my comment is from ChatGPT.
replyI can delete my comment, though.
Sorry - that probably came across as more passive-aggressive that I mean it. Just wanted to point out that guideline. People have easy access to AI, so they can always ask it for a summary if they want to and it doesn't really add anything to the discussion.
replyupd: removed ai-edited text from my comment
replyWorth noting that quoting and citing an LLM is miles better than just pasting AI generated text and passing it as your own.
replyAND, if you are too harsh on the former, you incentivize the latter.
At this point I believe that when people do not cite using AI to generate their comment it's from a position of malice... like you're intentionally trying to position yourself as capable in whatever subject you're talking on but realistically you are not given the reliance on an LLM. Not saying anything about OP but just a general observation/opinion I've been building recently. Seems more common than ever to larp using AI.
replyI did it once when I tried vibecoding, to a friend, nothing professional, and I watched myself stop at the explanation of how I did something. I think it comes from a place of desire, self delusion and shame (of not being able to do it alone), very similar to lying in general, people lie about what they want to be the truth.
reply> quoting and citing an LLM is miles better
replyNot really. If someone is interested in an LLM's opinion, they can ask it themselves, all LLM providers are one browser tab away.
I'm as antiAI as many. And this isn't a great example, but there's can be value added in both the context and the prompt. E.g:
reply"I recall topic X being related to fact Y.
Chatgpt says this when asked about how Y relates to X
"blablabla"
"