@bkuhn @copiesofcopies @cwebber
imo, it is not beneath anthropic (or other AI companies) to steer their models - either generally or on a targeted basis - toward outputs that represent their own best interests rather than that of FOSS or of the wider public, even if only in subtle ways.

do you think working out policy with humans exclusively, instead, has particular downsides that can't be overcome?

@nixCraft i'm sick and tired of borderline-eugenicist freakshows like linus and other techbros who are so obsessed with "intelligence" that they dismiss anyone and everyone who doesn't appear to display it in a way that affirms their own egos.

people like this shouldn't be leading or managing anything that involves other people.

@copiesofcopies no, it is not a value judgment, but it is similar to a debate over whether generative AI art is art. it's about the relationship between an underlying meaning/perspective and a produced output; LLMs simply do not have it. "slop" also encodes the types of issues and discrepancies that simply don't happen from sloppy human-produced code and art and that are, by design, tricky for humans to detect.

if an individual output at face value is all that matters, then no, this is not interesting. "slop" is associated with a context. the myth is that serious people can pretend there is no context and have an eye for the best outputs in a vaccuum. this is anything but serious.

@copiesofcopies

produce code that's far from slop

i would say perhaps code that doesn't look like slop or doesn't look sloppy, but if it is generated by an LLM, it is slop, and i think it is really important not to cede that point regardless of how impressive the output appears and even regardless of whether it happens to be good or correct in a particular instance. i will say more if you want, but my interpretation is based on what i've heard and read from linguistics professor emily bender (who is here on fedi too)

(in terms of the world looking different here than outside, i am probably proving your point and you might unfortunately be right though, but i also know that the media is pushing false and inflated narratives including about the prevalence of use, capabilities, and sentiments of users. it's not all false and many of us know people who are either true believers or deep down the pit, but i suspect it's not as widespread as we're being made to believe or to extrapolate based on a handful of personal anecdotes.)

@hbons @tante maybe offer to make them a better flyer and draw it on binder paper

@kbm0 @davidgerard i wonder if that's part of the reason for this change