[weiliddat]

I'm not sure how to interpret your comment. It could be

- a response to my comment saying that I am "illiterate" and cannot differentiate LLM output vs actual human comments (in that case I'm not sure what you're adding to the discussion here beyond a personal attack)

- a general comment saying it's getting harder for people in a position similar to us (i.e. tech / tech-adjacent who interact a lot with others who write with LLM assistance or via LLMs) to differentiate human/AI output.

I'll assume good faith and you mean the second. In that case maybe you can explain the "fundamental problem" you're referring to?

[rf15]

It was a general comment. Sorry for being unclear. I'm very bothered by hearing this exact thing a lot lately.

It's something I'm racking my brains over, how some people can tell certain things and intentions apart and others cannot - and how that set is different for everyone, and how this "flaw" is currently causing a lot of trouble because we, collectively, are not very well practiced in detecting this kind of thing.

I don't think the internet is dead just yet, because I don't think anybody truly has the concrete intention to destroy all knowledge.

[weiliddat]

No harm done, glad I clarified.

I'm generally an optimistic person and very trusting of others. I'd say I'm also a pretty good reader of intentions / listener based on people who are my friends / worked with me (anecdotal of course, take it how you will).

However, some of the comments in the GitHub issue... I can only assume the worst of intentions to ruin any/all motivation of the maintainer. Given we've seen social engineering and other attacks on other open source projects with increasing frequency, I can only assume that there are ulterior motives in such comments.

I cannot otherwise see how those comments would be constructive towards the maintainer or the other participants in the issue.