When your logo is AI, your illustrations are AI, and you profile pic is AI, I'm going to assume the text is AI too and won't read it.

▲

passivegains 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The text is just as you predict, but in fairness to the author using a .ai domain is a good way to set expectations up front.

	▲	AlienRobot 11 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This feels like it's performative AI. Just trying to use everything that has "AI" in it be more AI bro'er than other AI bro's.

▲

srdjanr 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I read it, and it is AI

▲

jorisw 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't think it is. Just the (somewhat lame) graphics are.

▲

Zambyte 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The text is very obviously heavily authored using AI. The more interesting question is: did a person even prompt an LLM to write on this subject? It seems likely that someone set up an agent using OpenClaw or something to just automatically write articles on popular topics in AI, and this is something that it came up with

▲

gpugreg 12 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sorry to say, but it almost certainly is AI.

- 51 EM-dashes

- Section headings

- Excessive repetitions: "The [...] are real. The [...] are real. The [...] is real. All three things are true at once."

- Excessive use of "genuine", "genuinely", "honest", "real", "true"

- Excessive use of "gap": "near-term gap", "the Compute Gap", "the Narrative Gap", "critical gap"

- Corny and meaningless closing sentence: "Understanding both parts is the beginning of taking AI deployment decisions seriously."

▲

hugh-avherald 11 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't believe my 20 year old university essays were written by AI, despite your criteria.

	▲	gpugreg 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Do your 20 year old university essays really fulfill all those criteria at once?

▲

Reason077 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

My slop sensor went off a couple of paragraphs in. The high word count, mild brewing melodrama, circling back on variations of the same point over and over.

Still an interesting topic, but a good human author could have used 50-70% less words to make the same argument.

▲

leokeba 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It most definitely is.

▲

ActionHank 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Now imagine that your work specs are generated by an AI agent that the EM is using.

Do you still care about the work?

▲

bastawhiz 12 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If my manager can't be bothered to do any actual work but expects me to, no. I'm quitting. Next question.

▲

SpicyLemonZest 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Even if I do still care about it, I hope I'm not so naive as to think that following the words of the AI agent will cause me to achieve my EM's intent. They'd be a useful reference at best for my actual knowledge of what they want that I found elsewhere.

▲

criley2 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Brother, I don't care who writes the specs as long as they sign the checks on time. And yes, I do care about my work even if upstream is slop. In a relay race, you can lower your performance to weakest leg, or you can be the strongest leg. And maybe I just like to run.

▲

ActionHank 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Fair enough, but now imagine that the code is slop too. You're getting slopped from both sides, do you still care?

	▲	criley2 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In my humble opinion, most of the code I've ever touched was slop, and I think I left it in a better state than I found it. What more can you do?

▲

glenstein 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And the domain is .ai

▲

rambojohnson 11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

dead internet theory.

▲

burntpineapple 13 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

	▲	cheevly 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is the correct response.

▲

deadbabe 12 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Even if it wasn’t, I probably still wouldn’t have read the article, so not much difference.