Nobody wants to label their stuff as AI generated because they removed credibility. Communities can flag posts as AI generated based on speculation and telltales but it won’t be 100% and will take extra work.

I think the era of the blog is simply dead now and that’s mostly ok. Blogspam and corporate blogs had killed quality bogs ages ago even before AI was a thing. The real question is what replaces it.

Oh and of course the $64k question is this: if an AI generated article is indistinguishable from a human written article and it is accurate and interesting, do you care who wrote it? We want to avoid low quality, not AI generation, right?

▲

agnishom 7 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> it is accurate and interesting, do you care who wrote it?

Yes, because I have an interest in traces and mechanisms of human connections being preserved.

▲

asdff 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Put it this way, if the ai article is indeed so good, why store the article in a dusty long form output mode from a soon to be obsolete model? Just give us the prompt, and in 6 months with some newer, bigger, better model, we can feed that prompt and get an even better article out of it.

	▲	maxaw 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		to play devils advocate - i doubt the articles that end up on the front page are one shotted (theres probably a sequence of back and forward refinement). and in any case, i feel the avg reader would actually not prefer to read the prompt, which would be very information dense having said that, i'd still much prefer a norm of including prompt history with the article, or the codebase for that matter, so people can choose for themselves :)
	▲	petesergeant 23 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The fallacy here is that you can reduce the wide range of things that “AI generated” means into a single flag. As for why not “show us the prompt”: https://sgnt.ai/p/prompt-is-not-the-work/

▲

Sateeshm 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> I think the era of the blog is simply dead now

The era of people caring about knowledge/learning seems to be dead. At least in the way we used to, because a lot of what we needed that for can now be done by the LLMs.

▲

archagon 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Pretty trivial for a writer to say “no AI used on this blog.”

▲

minimaxir 4 hours ago | parent [-]

And what's stopping a AI-written article from also doing that?

▲

archagon 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Reputation. If it’s not a one-off, they will eventually get discovered and lose their audience.

▲

mh- 34 minutes ago | parent [-]

I believe we're in a fairly limited window of time right now where that's even detectable via tools like Pangram. For small models it'll, maybe not the case. But for anything worth paying for.

	▲	archagon 30 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		They only have to slip up once. And they will, because LLM users are lazy, and LLM content naturally regresses towards the mean.

▲

fuckaiwriter 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

No I actually want to avoid AI generated content even when it is gold. I don’t want it. I dislike it. I hate it. Fuck AI.

▲

simonreiff 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Why don't you say how you really feel instead of being so wishy-washy?

▲

el_io an hour ago | parent [-]

They are pretty clear about how they feel.

	▲	arjie a minute ago \| parent [-]
		It’s an English language idiom that always trips me up. Here’s another example: https://englishidiomsblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/tell-us-how-y... The idiom is someone says “tell us how you really feel” (which he’s rephrased here) to express (I think) that one’s expressed opinion is far too dramatic in its opposition of some thing. It’s meant to be read ironically.

▲

satisfice 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If counterfeit or stolen cash is indistinguishable from real or honest cash, should you accept it? Should you spend it? No. Why? Because doing so erodes and potentially destroys society.

Whether you agree that a con artist is only a criminal if he gets caught, or you think he’s a criminal the whole time, surely you can see why many people might want to know if they are dealing with a friend and not something simulating a friend.

▲

not-a-llm an hour ago | parent [-]

bullshitting has never been a crime

if it were, 90% of startups would be illegal and they founders jailable

	▲	otterley an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Fraud is a crime, but admittedly, not all bullshitting is fraud.