bohoo

2016 and doesnt engage w connectionism, so useless

Like ive explained winning a competition and being slop are totally sympatico

Edit: I do think its an inditement of the competition when it happens though -- a better organised competition is going to deliver less slop (ai or human)

Its pretty clear that in many cases it doesnt need to be better than slop

So I think by and large it is

To actually answer your question its perfectly clear in a lot of cases that it is slop and theres some simply reasons why slop can win. 1. Generating ai slop is clearly less intensive than producing a real photograph, painting, drawing, etc.

2. Judges for competitions see a lot of stuff - tend to do it quickly - and theres a lot of randomness to who wins. I also just think that judges are often fairly terrible - maybe the incentives just dont exist for getting good judges, especially for competitions (unlike the Nikon one of course) which are smaller e.g. design a poster for our country fair.

So its easy to see that 1. means that the ratio of slop to real can be very high and by 2. the judging process is typically partly random and pretty fallible, so its easy to see how slop can win.

On the judge point, slop appeals to the average and the average is very approachable - so its often the case that people actually prefer ai art to work that is produced from out of an individuals unique experience and vision, which takes more effort to engage with.

Can you tell me your reasons for suspecting this likely isn't how we reason, or even a good analogy?

Do you know how you reason?

Perhaps you've reified it too much.

Either you used AI or you happen to write like an AI - in either case something to work on.

I do think my comment was lazily dismissive so you do have a point but in so far your post is basically just a gripe, I would think artful expression of said gripe is basically the only thing that makes it worthwhile. Phrases like the kind you only get from watching a decision go sideways in a boardroom stink of llm, are not artful and have extra irony riding along given the point you are making.

edit: No scratch that, artfulness is not necessary - just get better at screening out the flavour of AI, even if you find it useful to write with - because people will notice.

You clearly used AI pretty heavily to write this - so whats the point?

This reads like AI most of the time - you must spend more time writing yourself

Oh this is fantastic actually - and I was expecting slop - very well done.

> Hacker culture sees programming as a conversation with a machine as it runs.

That sounds like relating to me- but who wouldn't think of a hacker as a paradigm maker. So perhaps hacker straddles the two: both making and relating?

I think "poetry" is a protected term - so personally I don't this thing generates poetry.

Who does the author refer to with 'anonymous stochastic ringleader'?

I like the turn of phrase and understand it may be more of a poetic throwaway but I remain a bit uncertain as to what they had in mind.

What does the author mean by 'anonymous stochastic ringleader'