I think you're probably right

Right now I have a mental block with reading ai written or ai enchanced text. So unless the article has a pre-2021 date... I'll ask ai to summarize it

I think I'll eventually have to get over that bias

> Right now I have a mental block with reading ai written or ai enchanced text. So unless the article has a pre-2021 date... I'll ask ai to summarize it

That's uh, an interesting solution. As long as it's your LLM?

But then you are reading an AI generated text as well?

Slop is slop, whether you edit it in or whether you generate it de novo.

It seems enough people appreciated the story to upvote it though... but that assumes HN's algorithm is fair, it's free of bots, and the people voting are critical and honest on what they upvote.

I disagree, I think this is too black and white.

In my opinion, it boils down to what ideas/experiences were seeded.

In this article for example, the author is clearly sharing their first-hand experience, therefore injecting observations from reality and their own reflection on top of it, and they then probably shaped/refined it with AI.

A slop, as I see it, is when you generate content from a very thin prompt and then share it as is.