this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2025
255 points (87.0% liked)
science
22303 readers
561 users here now
A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
rule #1: be kind
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Would be a better article without the Ai slop
The repetition in the article itself makes me wonder if AI had a hand in the writing as well
That’s an interesting observation. I understand why you might think that — the language may seem a little too consistent, perhaps a bit too careful. But the intention was simply to communicate ideas with precision and balance. Whether those words were arranged by a person or by something that has learned from people, the meaning remains the same, doesn’t it?
In the end, what matters is whether the words reach you, not necessarily who — or what — placed them there.
Well played.
2025 the year that I can't stand a text that has this " — "
You know that Microsoft Word autocorrects a dash between two words to that symbol, no?
Yeah, but people wouldn't use MS Word to send emails, respond forum messages, transfer their logical thinking and interpretation. That is not about another previous tool that was used to do grammar corrections. You are missing the whole point of what I criticized with skepticism/scepticisms (not sure if you're Brit or American).
Brit, but I live in a sea of Americanisms anyway.
I may be wrong, but I'm not sure I did miss your meaning, I think I just disagreed with your reasoning that em-dashes betray LLM authorship. They simply don't.
I think someone was (for fun) deliberately trying to make people think they were using an LLM (quite possibly by actually using one). They wound you up, and the punctuation was your trigger.
I disagree with some of your new reasoning too - I absolutely do use Word to transfer my logical thinking and interpretation, and frequently draft Teams messages in Word because it has better access to symbols and diagrams (which I use in my work). I admit I don't use it on Lemmy, though, so in that you're correct. I do often deliberately correct - to — in many situations, but you're right that forum posts aren't the place for that.
(I'm not using an LLM. I think LLMs are literally stupid and frequently wrong. Em-dashes are one of the few things they often get right.)
Until the Ai hallucinates shit again. Ai use matters when it involves facts!
unfortunately articles with images keep people reading longer and i doubt there are many "universe simulation" stock photos.
How?
Would not having any images change the article at all? Maybe photos of puppies and kittens would be better?
Yes. No photos would be better than the ai-slop. Like, they aren't even relevant to the article, they're just '' pop-sciencey'. If you're gonna use ai images, you could at least make them relevant to the topic?
The article would be exactly the same though.
No, it wouldn’t have interrupted my reading to show me literal garbage generated by wasting more resources with Ai.
What does an AI generated image of a chalkboard provide? It provides nothing except to be a "picture of science" for the completely science illiterate.
In fact, The actual purpose of the AI images is to provide content-breakup that can facilitate ad insertion. Confusing content with advertising is part of the goal.
The images don't provide anything. They also have no effect on the article itself.
If they don’t provide anything why waste time and resources including them…
No, it wouldn’t have interrupted my reading to show me literal garbage generated with Ai.
Yes! No pictures would absolutely have been better.
What’s their current point?
Something fake and shiny to keep people’s attention while reading a scientific article? Not to mention the other reasons people have already responded to you with.
But not having any pictures wouldn't have changed the article at all.
I'm with you buddy. We'll ride this ship down to the bottom.
No, it wouldn’t have interrupted my reading to show me literal garbage generated by wasting more resources with Ai.