Post #1123434 · Elektrine

2026-04-12 17:00 UTC

There is a certain brand of user (who may or may not be a human) who draws the venn of 'AI slop' and 'AI output' as a circle. They've taken the extremist position that AI should be uninvented and any use of AI is the worst thing that could possibly happen to any project and they'll have an entire grab bag of misinformation-based memes to shotgun at you. Engaging with these people is about as productive as trying to convince a vaccine denier that vaccines don't cause autism. I'm not saying that the user you replies to believes this, but the comment they wrote is indistinguishable from the comments of such a user. e: I'd also like to point out that these users are very much attracted to low-effort activism. This is why you see comments like mind being heavily downvoted but not many actual replies. They want to try to influence the discussion but don't have the capability or motivation to step into the ring, so to speak, and defend their opinions.

Replies (2)

@ell1e@leminal.space 2026-04-12 17:07

It's less extremist if you look at how easily these LLMs will just plagiarize 1:1, apparently: https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/38072#issuecomment-4105681567 Some see "AI slop" as "identified by the immediate problems of it that I can identify right away". Many others see "AI slop" as bringing many more problems beyond the immediate ones. Then seeing LLM output as anything but slop becomes difficult.

Open ##1123435
@hperrin@lemmy.ca 2026-04-12 18:36

According to the US Copyright Office, AI generated material cannot be copyrighted (unless of course it’s plagiarized copyrighted code). That’s reason enough to leave it out of the kernel. If the kernel’s license becomes unenforceable because of public domain code, the kernel is tainted. Edit: I don’t know why people are downvoting this. It’s literally just the truth: https://sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/#More-Information

Open ##1123436