[Toby1VC]

Nice jewish word mostly meant to mock. Why would I care what a plugin that I don't even see in use has to say to my face (since I had to read this with all the interpretation potential and receptiveness available). The same kind of inserted judgment that lingers similar to "Yes, I will judge you if you use AI".

[softskunk]

There’s nothing wrong with judgment. Judging someone’s character based on whether they use generative “AI” is a valid practice. You may not like being judged, but that’s another matter entirely.

[miningape]

Yep, if you churn out a bad change - AI or not - I'm going to be more careful with reviewing what you put out*. This is judgement, and it is a good thing - it helps us prioritise what is worth doing, and how much time should be spent on it.

If your attitude is consistently "idk the AI made it" and you refuse to review it yourself. For 1, I am insulted that you think I should pick up your slack, and 2, I'm going to judge you and everything you put out even more harshly - for my own sanity, and trying to keep debt under control.

Judgement isn't a bad thing, it's how we decide good from bad. Pretending that it is because it uniquely discriminates against bad practise only proves to me that it's worth doubling down on that judgement.

* - I won't necessarily say/do anything different, but I am more careful - and I do start to look for patterns / ways to help.

[Toby1VC]

This is not judgment as much as it is programming a community and is perpetuating the opposite of correct judgment since it's inserting an emotion and opinion into a collective mind and discourse (the headline alone which might be all a lot of people scan and a tone-setter). It's going to cause reactions like the one you just had at many points in time used against people that decide to use modern tools. If Discurse wanted to start a discussion that might solve a problem they could have used a better headline.

[softskunk]

What exactly is the problem with having an opinion? People are allowed to have opinions. People working in a field are allowed and even expected to have opinions on that field’s current state and goings-on.

Your opinion, if I had to guess, is that generative “AI” can be good and useful. My opinion is that it’s an insult to humanity that causes considerable harm and should not be used. These are both valid opinions to have, although they disagree with each other.

Don’t fall into the trap of “I’m objectively correct, everyone else just has opinions”.

[Toby1VC]

>There’s nothing wrong with judgment. Judging someone’s character based on whether they use generative “AI” is a valid practice. You may not like being judged, but that’s another matter entirely.

You and I know that using AI is a metric to consider when judging ability and quality.

The difference is that it's not judgment but a broadcast, announcement.

In this case a snotty one from Discourse.

I mention that it lingers because I think that is a real psychological effect that happens.

Small announcements like this carry over into the future and flood any evaluation of yourself which can be described as torture and sabotage since it has an effect on decisions you make sometimes destroying things.

[softskunk]

So people will be more likely to think twice before using Cursor, Copilot et al? Good. I think they should.

Your comparison to torture and sabotage is unfounded to the point of being simply bizarre.

[1gn15]

I think humans should use AI as much as possible. Just putting that thought out there, so people are less likely to think twice.

[BigTTYGothGF]

> Nice jewish word

"Slop" doesn't seem to be Yiddish: https://www.etymonline.com/word/slop, and even if it was, so what?

[mattlondon]

Which word? Slop? I think it is from medieval old English if that is the word you are referring to.