• Tetsuo@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    I understand that. It’s the downvoting of the clearly marked as AI LLM response. Is it detrimental to the conversation here to have that? Is it better to share nothing rather than this LLM output?

    Was this thread better without it?

    Is complete ignorance of the PNG compatibility preferable to reading this AI output and pondering how true is it?

    [list 200 links]

    Now I think this conversation is getting just rude for no reason. I think the AI output was definitely not the “I’m lucky” result of a Google search and the fact that you choose that metaphor is in bad faith.

    • pticrix@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      15 hours ago

      I’ll spell out for you why I feel these two things are the same. You’re welcome to disagree, but maybe it will give you some pointers as to why a lot of people are annoyed by these LLM copy-pasta.

      First, a note for your ego : Remember, we don’t know you! You might have read through the whole thing that the LLM generated, and then cross-referenced the sources it gave you and then found some more, and you established the veracity of what it told you. OR you might have not bothered and just copy-pasted it for the clout, I guess, which is what the majority of LLM users do when publishing these answers. Ask for some explanations on how to solve a problem to a student who let a LLM give them the answer to an assignment instead of doing the work, if you need proof. 9/10 won’t be able to, because they didn’t bother to understand it - and I’m being generous in my statistics, in my experience.

      There’s also a lot of research that hints that the long term effect of using this tool in that way are deleterious to your critical thinking skills.
      We don’t know you, so, chances are you’re in the lot of the majority, as far as we’re concerned.

      Then, given that you probably didn’t put much effort into this text (as far as we can tell), there is an imbalance of effort required for us to look through it critically. Why the fuck would we put in the effort, if you most likely were not keen in putting so much in yourself? That’s kinda disrespectful, and egotistical. And also why I feel I am justified to assume that ctrl+c/ctrl+v an LLM output directly is tantamount to copy pasting a list of link from google. If you went through the trouble of validating the LLM output, how about just writing with your own word what you just realized / learned / validated? You can even dictate with tons of FOSS software nowadays if you’re unable to type!

      So that’s what I have for now, food for your thoughts I hope. I’m sure I could find more reasons, but I’m going to go do something fun instead.

    • Evkob (they/them)@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Was this thread better without it?

      Yes.

      I, and I assume most people, go into the comments on Lemmy to interact with other people. If I wanted to fucking chit-chat with an LLM (why you’d want to do that, I can’t fathom), I’d go do that. We all have access to LLMs if we wish to have bullshit with a veneer of eloquency spouted at us.