> This attempt could be refined but it's a decent start:

>> [...] having a polished appearance but lacking originality. None of the points it makes are novel and it doesn't connect them in novel ways either.

I have some bad news for you. Not every human is a Mozart or an Einstein. The long tail of human output has plenty of examples of the lack of originality, from bodice-rippers and pulp paperbacks and sloppy 'journalism' and 'style' magazines and articles, to carbon-copy soldiers, children in school uniforms, derivative music and film, the 5-minute Bruce Willis vehicles at the tail end of his career (though he clearly had a very good reason to make those), the cookie cutter quick-fab homes in American sub-divisions, cogs in human machines and systems of all sorts, the banality of life itself (at times) ...

▲

OrangePilled a day ago | parent [-]

Taken to its extremes this rebuttal could qualify as "slop" according to the Lobste.rs comment I sourced that definition from. I'm not even trying to be snarky. This is almost an exact reiteration of a response to the linked comment.

20% of your response is just a reiteration of one that was made to the original comment that I linked to. As far as the remaining 80% goes, it's something to think about but I'm not sure what your own point is. Do you hold any of the things you named dear to you enough to not call them "slop"?

	▲	ninjagoo a day ago \| parent [-]
		LOL You must be new around here. Since you sound sincere: "I have bad news for you" and its variant "Boy, do I have some bad news for you" are a rhetorical 2000s internet-specific stock reply format with a dry, corrective, often smug setup that means "your assumptions are wrong". More recently, it got turned into memes. In this specific case the unstated assumption being that human output inherently bears originality, as opposed to AI output. Proper use of that phrase is an art form, a rhetorical flourish reserved for use by those skilled in the art of the Internet put-down, and elicits a soft knowing smile in those that enjoy banter. :-) Obviously, @mjec on lobste.rs is one so skilled. That you failed to recognize it, twice, marks you as human, and one that's not very savvy in the ways of the Internet, or able to distinguish slop from art. Any decently trained AI would have recognized it immediately. And no, I don't hold any of those things I named dear enough to not call them slop, because, dude, I did call them slop... LOL This is too much fun. Sorry that it came at your expense, I guess. I'll have to play with the 2B and 9B models to see if they fail to recognize the phrase. The bigger models all recognize it. LOL Now get off my lawn ;-) PS: that burning sensation you likely feel around your ears is the subliminal recognition that, in this exchange, ai is winning out over a human, and it's not even present... Again, apologies that my merriment is at your expense. Hopefully you don't take yourself too seriously :-)