I find it interesting that you request me to discuss subject matter when your post is intellectually equivalent to: "I generated this sequence of numbers using my pseudo-random number generator"

I find it interesting you still continue with personal attacks without saying nothing of substance. What is wrong factually in the post? Why are you convinced I'm an AI? I also find it interesting that you've just been hostile throughout this entire interaction and still have nothing to add to the actual discussion. Stop the slop.

Alright, here I go.

I don't think you are AI. I merely lament the fact that you found it appropriate to post a clearly LLM generated comment.

The problem with LLM generated comments for me is not their content, but rather their nature. I am not addressing the "actual discussion", as in my personal opinion, there is no "discussion" to be had. The post constitutes an automated response akin to an answering machine (be it much more sophisticated), and I generally do not find discussions with answering machines interesting at all.

That sounds like a you problem. Since you're not interested in discussing anything or finding this to be an actual discussion, I'll stop trying to engage you in good faith anymore, sorry.

I don't think people should be rude to you, but the comment was AI-generated, right? Lots of people dislike that as it feels kind of wasteful and disrespectful of our time; it can literally take you less time to generate the comment than for us to read it, and the only information you added is whatever was in the (presumably much shorter) prompt. If you'd written it yourself, it may or may not be interesting and correct, but I'd at least know that someone cared enough to write it and all of it made sense from that person's perspective. Sometimes I am interested in an LLM's take on a topic, but not when browsing a forum for humans.

I'm sorry but if you're blaming some text on a website to be "disrespectful of our time", I don't know what to say to you.

I stand behind everything on my comment and I have engaged in good faith with every single reply to it here (even though none of them talk about anything in the comment itself).

Go through my profile, see how I engage with people and tell me again I'm AI.

If you do not have anything to say to the subject matter of a comment and just have personal snide remarks, I do think it's a waste of your time but do not blame me for it or tell me to leave the platform.

Typing this comment right now is a waste of time for me but I do not feel the need to grandstand over it as if there's a massive opportunity cost to it. I'm a human writing/interacting in a "forum for humans."

I didn't say or think that your account was AI-run, and I didn't tell you to leave the platform. I just tried to explain why your comment might have annoyed people and triggered negative responses (while agreeing that the rude ones were inappropriate).

Sure, cheers then. I don't care about negative responses if they're negative just because they think it's AI-generated, without having to say anything substantial on the actual comment or the article. I have demonstrated my willingness to engage in good faith but those comments have not.

If negative responses have no substance behind it, it makes no sense to care about them or take them seriously.

Also, the fact that you assume it takes more time reading that comment than it took for me to write is pretty weird (I still don't get what was so wrong about the comment that simply reading it is a waste of time to people).

> the fact that you assume it takes more time reading that comment than it took for me to write is pretty weird

I didn't do that either! I had no idea whether you just fired off a quick prompt and pasted the result without even reading it, or spent ages crafting and rereading and revising it, or (most likely) something in between those extremes. I said generated comments can take less time to create than to read, and that's one reason people push back against them. There's a risk that the forum just gets buried in comments that take near-zero effort to 'write' but create non-trivial time/effort/annoyance for those of us wading through them in search of actual human perspectives. And even the relatively good ones will be little different from what we could all obtain from an LLM if we wanted it.

FWIW, I didn't even get to the substance, because I instinctively bounce off LLM-written content posted in human contexts without explanation. You're obviously free not to care about that, and I wouldn't have replied and got into this meta discussion if not for the back-and-forth you were already involved in.

edit: but if you do care about getting through to people like me, even a short manually-written introduction can make me significantly more likely to read the rest of the content. To me, pure LLM output is a pretty strong signal of a bot/low-effort human account. But if someone acknowledges that they're pasting in an AI response and bothers to explain why they think it's interesting and worthwhile, I'll look at it with more of an open mind.

I stand by the comment in its entirety. If formatting is an issue that makes it unreadable for you (to not even get to the substance), I can't help you. I do not care about "getting through" to anyone, I'm a human interacting on a human forum and I responded to the content of the article which was mostly BS about creating AI slop (on top of being a content marketing piece trying to sell people shit using deceptive claims).

But I will defend myself when I'm told obtuse things without any substance backing it.

I'm obviously just annoying you, which really wasn't my goal, so I'll stop here. But I want to note that if you think this all comes down to "formatting", you're still not hearing what I'm trying to say.