I reads like an unhinged rant about AI and the engineers who use it, with the entitled tone of people who think they have permission to insult someone's competence and work because AI was used.
In my opinion, if one cannot express themselves civilly, they should refrain from commenting.
I disagree. I wouldn't consider it unhinged. I'm clearly aware of my own frustration. It's also relatively civil, since I was able to temper it with appropriate apologies and acknowledgements. Many other people agree and support the sentiment of what I'm saying.
AI is a powerful tool and very capable of - amongst other things - making something look far more valuable than it actually is, and that is a huge waste of time that costs us all. We all have a responsibility to call this out when we see it.
It looks like you've just implied I'm entitled, unhinged, uncivil and and that I shouldn't have contributed at all, whilst thinking you've elevated yourself above that behaviour by saying "in my opinion" and "one should...". I think that's an unhinged, insulting and uncivil way to express yourself.
I found the website you ranted about interesting, comparing the quality of the visualization between the different models.
I don't think it was "a huge waste of time" or needed your rant.
You called it slop and questioned the competence of the author, as if he made grand claims about the objectivity of his comparison.
What I see often is that people assume others are incompetent just because they used AI, when in reality they are engineers no less competent or experienced than others on this website.
This is slop, in the sense that it looks like a lot of useful work and effort, and AI is heavily involved, and it was offered up when the opposite was requested, meaning it's not at all helpful in this context.
I raised this in a harsh, but repeatedly apologetic way. The person then responded telling me to "get my facts straight" and doubled down with more weak, qualitative outputs of LLMs.
I don't assume the person is incompetent because they used LLMs. I use them daily. I'm a firm believer everyone is an idiot, just in a different subject.
The issue here I feel is that LLMs are increasingly leading people think that they're not an idiot in any subject at all, and when real humans question it, they double down with more AI stuff.
You think it was civil when the comment started with:
> this post gets me irrationally irritated and makes me want to shake you and shout
Yes, criticism of my work would not generally be a personal insult.
However, if you were to call my work 'slop', and say that I'm either inexperienced or that I'm an 'over-invested-in-AI engineer' we would be having a problem on a personal level. This is not a civil or respectful way to talk to someone.
> You think it was civil when the comment started with:
>> this post gets me irrationally irritated and makes me want to shake you and shout
Did you read the rest of the comment? The rest of it is civil. It's normal for people to start by saying something like "this makes me frustrated" as a preface to indicate their feelings, and then not actually act frustrated and instead calmly work through their thoughts. That is a meatspace social convention (not just an online one) - are you not aware of it?
> However, if you were to call my work 'slop'
And, as previously established, if you use AI, it's not your work.
> and say that I'm either inexperienced or that I'm an 'over-invested-in-AI engineer' we would be having a problem on a personal level
...and those are still criticisms of your work, not yourself.
The actual problem here is that you are taking offense to things that are not offensive, not that the parent poster was being uncivil. Thinking that calling someone "inexperienced" is a personal insult is absolutely insane. That's a wildly miscalibrated sense of how social dynamics work and what it actually means to insult someone.
