[minimaxir]

A symptom of the increasing backlash against generative AI (both in creative industries and in coding) is that any flaw in the resulting product is predicate to call it AI slop, even if it's very explicitly upfront that it's an experimental demo/proof of concept and not the NEXT BIG THING being hyped by influencers. That nuance is dead even outside of social media.

[stonogo]

AI companies set that expectation when their CEOs ran around telling anyone who would listen that their product is a generational paradigm shift that will completely restructure both labor markets and human cognition itself. There is no nuance in their own PR, so why should they benefit from any when their product can't meet those expectations?

[minimaxir]

Because it leads to poor and nonconstructive discourse that doesn't educate anyone about the implications of the tech, which is expected on social media but has annoyingly leaked to Hacker News.

There's been more than enough drive-by comments from new accounts/green names even in this HN submission alone.

[krupan]

It does lead to poor non-constructive discourse. That's why we keep calling those CEOs to task on it. Why are you not?

[dwaltrip]

The CEOs aren't here in the comments.

[LinXitoW]

Which is why we ought to always bring up their BS every time people try to pretend it didn't happen.

The promises made are ABSOLUTELY relevant to how promising or not these experiments are.

[pertymcpert]

I bet you get upset when you buy a new iPhone and don't love it, because Tim Cook said on the ad that they think you're going to love it.

[amlib]

It's not just social media, it's IRL too.

Maybe the general population will be willing to have a more constructive discussions about this tech once the trillion dollar companies stop pillaging everything they see in front of them and cease acting like sociopaths whose only objectives seem to be concentrating power, generating dissidence and harvesting wealth.