|
Here's my metric for "LLM-assisted" anything: if I, as someone who is well-informed on LLMs and pays close attention to the content I consume, can't tell an LLM generated the article/code/image/music/voice, it's fine and indicates that you as a person put enough effort into shaping the output to claim it as your own. If you can't even be bothered to do that much, to make it not completely obvious that an LLM generated it, you have no right to call it "assisted" or stake any ownership of the content. And I think it is frankly insulting to your readers that you would expect them to read something you couldn't even bother prioritising enough to write. If your ideas are actually worth sharing with the world, they would be worth making the time to write about. And to be especially clear, my objection is not rooted in the moral aspect of LLM generation (although they are frequently used to plagiarise as well). My objection is that if I can tell the LLM generated it, it means the content is genuinely garbage. LLM output for writing is garbage. So too for code. So too for art. With enough human effort on top of it (usually more than doing it from scratch, IME), you can get it into a not-garbage state, but you didn't, and instead I wasted my time reading part of an article in which the writing was too bad for me to finish it. From my perspective, the internet I once knew has been destroyed. The spambots won. Now spambots are openly accepted, promoted, reach the front page all the time. Somehow it is not a moderation policy to kill spambot posts and ban offenders. All because spambot technology advanced enough to fool people who are just consuming content passively. And now I have to sift through so, so much garbage to find the people who are still putting effort into creating content. Their work is being buried. It feels like living in a surreal nightmare for the past two years. Footnote: Although I called the content you posted garbage, this is not an attack on you, because you did not write the content. I have not personally insulted you, so I hope that rather than taking this personally, you might reflect on whether this is really the way you want to express your ideas to the world. You might get views, but are your ideas really resonating? A lot of people mindlessly scroll the internet to kill time rather than critically engaging with content and digesting it. Is your ideal audience one who reads your idea and then forgets about it seconds later as they move on to the next shiny thing on the screen? |