It honestly feels very disrespectful of my time when someone sends me an AI slop response or email.
Don't be that person.
I never have this problem of people giving me AI responses to my questions.
What I do have a problem with is people who do this:
I have both and now have both links saved for reference
Hey
It has been an interesting experience telling people who only say hello that they're being rude.
I think autism bit me in the ass again 😭
I used to contract with a company where it was almost ubiquitous for someone to start a text-based conversation with the entire message: "Hey..." — ellipses and everything. It was bad enough that other members of my company that were contracted to the same contract would jokingly add ellipses to random things when messaging each other.
Odd...
...?
I got an email from a client last week asking me to install an AI-generated list of containers onto a server. The key container, the database at the center of the whole system, has commits from Claude in it's git repository. Great start guys.
They outsouced the software architect job to a chatbot and then had a veteran of the industry who has been around since the internet equivalent of the big bang install a handful of docker containers. Reverse centaur to the max.
It's going to hurt in 12 months time if they realise the reason why everything sucks is because they built on sand. But they probably won't even realise why the project failed because their chatbot won't be able to tell them why.
This comes obvious to me, but if I wanted to ask an LLM I would've done it myself
Personally "I checked with Claude" invalidates anything you just said, even if it was properly researched and legitimately correct. As soon as you invoke the slopbots I lose any regard for your answer.
It's basically the "appeal to authority" fallacy only worse because Claude is neither an authority nor a provider of hard info.
Nor appealing!
Judging or dismissing a PERSON for using tools you don’t respect = valid.
Saying you “invalidate” content that is “properly researched and legitimately correct” = what?
I mean most people have no idea how to “properly research” - this has been true for centuries - sloppy research is not a new phenomenon. If something was “properly researched” why would you reject it?
As the one says above it is "Appeal to Authority" by adding Claude, or ChatrGPT for the more base level folks, from what I have seen.
Somehow they assume that putting that in will somehow make their words more valid, but hearing it makes me question everything, and dismiss potential valid points made alongside it.
Because we don't see all that research, we just see a comment where you said you asked the hallucination machine, so now, if I want to use anything you said, I have to go duplicate all that research before I can trust it.
So what you meant to say was “if you claim that you legitimately researched but you mention Claude - I will assume you did not”.
Which is valid. But is not what you said.
More accurately, if you claim you used Claude, I will assume absolutely anything produced with it has a high chance of being rife with errors. If you provided citations for every last detail and then said Claude put it together, I wouldn't trust it until I've personally verified the sources because not only will it hallucinate details, it'll hallucinate sources. Anything produced with it is inherently untrustworthy.
To add on to what you said, i would trust the same thing more if it was just a human saying it was correct and implicitly staking their reputation on it, vs if the same person said, "i checked with Claude and it agreed."
To me, this means the person turned off their brain and is invoking Claude's reputation, which also means i shouldn't trust that person's judgment either.
That's true regardless of the sources someone used.
Yeah, but the only source explicitly provided in this hypothetical is the hallucination machine.
You are so right.
I checked with Claude
You guys are the worst. I’m now convinced all of you complaining have nothing going on. Every industry is using this shit. I was just watching this video of a big musician YouTuber using a vibe coded app that lets you create guitar tones by what you tell it. Kojima did an ad with Prada using it. You can be the curmudgeon all you fucking want but go do it to the big guys and quit fighting this bullshit culture war against low hanging fruit. You miserable fucks.
Ironically this page seems to be entirely made of slop, the whole text reeks of claudisms, as opposed to https://noslopgrenade.com/
Noslopgrenade also reads like a slop grenade
What really seals it is the 'angry' version, which is just the same message again but with different formatting. No human would label that as "the angry version" without the inclusion of at least one "fucking".
I was just coming to comment this. Slop telling us not to paste slop. How nice.
if someone pastes text from llm, i wont even read it.
My response to one person was "If you couldn't take the time to write it, what makes you think I'm going to take the time to read it."
I'll wait for the "Fuck you for using AI you lazy twat" website.
Scroll to the bottom, there's a link to a spicier phrasing.
Also, quote from there:
You're just making someone lose respect for you in real time, in a way that's hard to walk back.
I feel that, I have lost respect for people that way and don't want to be friends anymore :(
Don't copy and paste. Type it out with rage!
Or maybe just don't use AI at all? It's not a reliable source of information, it's unsustainable in terms of resources consumed, it's unethically trained and it makes everyone's lives worse.
We were having an urgent issue at work and my coworker said he had a solution and I said what was it and he sent like three paragraphs which I read through and I said, "what the fuck does this even say? did you even read this?" he said, he thought it was a solution and I asked why he bothered to even send it and he said he wanted to send me the "source". I was like, I don't have time to deal with the core of this issue but if anyone sends me AI shit without checking it themselves, I'm gonna flip.
This drives me nuts, when an urgent issue comes up I value concise, accurate answers so we can quickly agree and actually do the work.
We had an urgent issue recently and upper management wanted a plan for validating the fix. Rather than talking to the expert the manager one level down just sent an AI written suggestion without checking with anyone. After having checked with the correct person, I had to respond with "This is the MIL standard, we should follow this" while "ignoring" the manager's email. Luckily I had the goodwill to get away with correcting people like that.
They tried to solve the problem using AI, got AI slop, but didn't understand why it wouldn't help.
If a piece of the model's answer is genuinely useful, quote it and say why. "I checked with Claude and this part lines up:" works great.
It still drives me nuts when my boss does that. Especially since the next thing he sends is a bunch of AI-generated code he just wants us to copy and paste into our application. He treats anything the magic AI says as authoritative, and it overrides anything an actual person can say to him.
I am once again astounded at how stupid people are, man. People be sending me AI-generated statements to prove me wrong all the time. I have a family member who always tries to be sly about it but I always see through it and they don't understand how I do but they sure keep fucking doing it.
https://distantprovince.by/posts/its-rude-to-show-ai-output-to-people/ is more thoughtful and interesting
Send this to the people in your life, you know who
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
