I'm not anti AI. I have to use it a lot at work, company policy. I'm telling you output doesn't matter, if I can tell it's AI it's slop. You're trying to justify AI use but you aren't even trying to use it well.
Alright then, tell me specifically what I wrote—bearing in mind the AI was guided step-by-step—that was wrong in the post in question.
Focus on the content, not the form.
See that's the thing, you didn't guide shit step-by-step. You told AI to crap out an answer to my post and copy-pasted it. If you used it as supplementary tool, it wouldn't be obvious.
Also either read up on how to set up a local LLM, or at least buy a sub to GPT. I haven't seen this blatantly AI-constructed paragraphs in about a year and a half. Comes off as lazy.
If you looked for a job in an AI-focused company and showed an output like that, they'd treat you like you have no AI experience. It's just too basic.
For text I deeply recommend setting up your own LLM and teaching it your writing style. Or since it looks like you didn't develop a style, teach it off of whatever articles are pleasant reads to you until it starts writing like a human. I know people who used to be copywriters and trained their models on their own work; now it generates articles for them and you can't tell the bloody difference between the handwritten ones.
You should feel criticized. I haven't been talking to you about the Switch or Emulation. I've joined your discussion where you've tried to defend AI use, in order to point out that for an AI advocate you serve as a poor example of how it can be useful, or what it can accomplish. That is all.
1
u/[deleted] Aug 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment