Assuming this post was deleted by a moderator, is that then a tacit confirmation that we ought flag content we suspect is LLM-generated? And is it only LLM-content that “mislead recipients as to the source of the material” or also content that is clearly marked as being “AI”-generated?
The LLM crap(calling it “AI” is an insult to the concept) needs to be aggressively reported and shamed. Reddit is now a dumpster fire of vague idiotic overly verbose questions no human has ever asked getting vague idiotic answers. Show no mercy, do not concern yourself about collateral damage, it’s war.
3 Likes
So…
We should report all AI posts?
It doesn’t seem like McNeel has an official position. The terms of service haven’t been updated in 13 years, long before so-called generative AI. But one probably ought distinguish between at least these two cases:
But again, to answer Wim’s PM question, I personally don’t think an AI answer is better than no answer. If people want AI they should ask AI. But that’s just, like, my opinion maaaaan.. either way, it would be nice with some clarity on the matter.
2 Likes
Valid and I agree
Well I think the users here are doing a reasonably good job of flagging AI slop and generally McNeel will remove posts flagged as such, especially if there is no real contribution to the discussion. So I’m not sure there needs to be an “official statement of position” by McNeel.
Keep on flaggin’…!
2 Likes
The point of my first (and today’s post) is that this effort does not appear to be appreciated by moderators. Despite being in line with the forum terms of service/FAQ.
So I’m finding it difficult to understand how one can disagree that an official McNeel statement is in order. Or at least might clarify things a bit 
I have not gotten that impression, pretty much everything I have flagged as AI slop has not been contested. Not all was deleted though I guess. I assume the moderators have other things to do as well.
As documented above, it unfortunately is my impression/experience.
You don’t know how much slop gets taken down before it reaches the public list. It is quite a lot. At the same time, LLMs are used by non-native speakers to polish up their language, which I think is a legitimate use of LLMs. So I think it is a careful balance between allowing the use of a spellchecker on steroids on the one hand, and removing verbatim LLM output on the other.
1 Like
Again, I’m not arguing for/against anything (please read the first post). I’m simply pointing out that, again:
-
The forum terms of service are vague/outdated on the topic of machine generated/LLM/AI content.
-
There’s a discrepancy between the forum FAQ and moderator behaviour.