302
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024
302 points (100.0% liked)
PC Gaming
8568 readers
255 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm convinced you guys just don't read if you've never seen an article that's blatantly loaded with fluff so you'll scroll past more ads. Or maybe y'all are just that obtuse.
We literally had to create a bot to cut out all of the fluff in articles to make news these days more digestible.
I’ve seen tons of them. I never denied the issue. It’s real, and it’s very annoying. But using the fact that AI generated articles exist to justify spouting uninformed opinions based on nothing but a headline is ridiculous.
Instead of reading a headline, assuming it means what you think it does and being wrong, then writing a comment based on that wrong opinion, you could at least glance at the article. You have enough time to write an angry comment, you can’t spend 10 seconds glancing at the article to see if it has any info that the 5 word headline might not have covered?
Or alternatively, if it’s such an imposition, then just don’t comment.
Lmao you didn't even stop to read who you're talking to. I'm not the one who wrote the opinion, and I said as much in my first comment. I don't even agree with the guy.
At least now the downvotes make sense. Y'all are just having a reddit moment.
I saw that you were a different person, I don’t see how that’s relevant. You chimed in saying you also didn’t read the article because of your opinion that most articles now are AI generated nonsense not worth consuming. Nothing in your first comment said you didn’t agree with him at all.
I’d get it if the guy you replied to said “read the article, it’s super interesting!” and then you said “I didn’t read it because most text articles are AI generated nonsense so maybe that’s why they didn’t bother either” to add perspective.
But that wasn’t what happened. The OP spouted a nonsense opinion based off what he thought was going on, which was wrong, the next guy told him to read the article before running his mouth, and you chimed in to say “who reads articles, it’s all AI generated nonsense anyways now” which to me, comes off as a defense of spouting uninformed bullshit based off zero information.
🤦♀️ "I'd get it if the guy you replied to said exactly what he said."
The only one having a reddit moment is you mate, instead of admitting you posted a dumb comment because you didnt bother reading an article and didnt understand the context you keep pushing forwards attaking everyone. is it that hard saying: "hey, i'm wrong, i didnt read the article so i understood something different."? What is funnier is that you are not even the original op, but you obviously had the same thought process and felt attacked by being at that same level.
All I said was I wouldn't blame him given the garbage state of news articles these days, and you guys took that opportunity to put words in my mouth so y'all could get on your high horse. And you're still doing it after I said "I don't even agree with the guy" lmao. If there ever was a "reddit moment" it's this.
It's also really funny how you wrote this as if I was the other guy, then had to edit in the last bit to make it seem like you didn't jump to a conclusion after only reading the last sentence of my comment. The irony here is hilarious.
Yeah, at first i thought it was you the original op, because its funny how triggered you are, the difference is i was able to see i was wrong and edited my post. Anyway, keep salty and not bothering to read the most basic of stuff. Maybe you can think about it and see why you failing at first grade reading is why you are so trigger happy and tilted over anything.
Lmao, no, you thought I was "the original op" because you skipped everything about me not being him or agreeing with him, and only read the last sentence.
Maybe read more than 1 sentence. I know it's too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read more than 1 sentence.
I have to give you something, its funny how you will never admit you are wrong and keep pushing forward instead of reading your own posts for a second to see how clueless you are.
It wasnt because i had read only 1 line, it was because i had read all your posts attacking more people that replied to you about how stupid you were saying that you didnt read articles because of AI articles which made no sense in the context of a quote for an interview, even more from a website that is more or less popular and not known for doing AI articles as far as i know. Anyway, thats my last reply, you can reread your posts or keep crying, its your choice i guess.
Right, you only read the last sentence because you already made up your mind.
Cope lol
So your plan is just to read headlines and make assumptions? I'm sure that will give you a much clearer insight into things.
Maybe read the previous comment. I know it's too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read the entire comment.