I think the future is people's AI agents evaluating the content generated by other people's AI agents and vice versa.

What the humans would see would be what is filtered up to them after all of this evaluation is done. And content generation would be the reverse. People would provide a seed of an idea and then their agents would turn that into potentially useful work.

For me the only thing that matters is the content the quality of the writing. If you're primarily interested in something else than content and quality, there is no point in reading at all. So I don't understand these anti-AI posts. If all they say is that most AI written texts are too long and badly written, I agree. However, that's also the case for many texts written by humans.

How do I type this character on my English keyboard? — also not reading what you didn't write.

I'm finding that executives at work are generating AI slop and sending it at each other and teams that are then meant to digest it, without any critical thought. Often these are sloppy and contain broad mistakes that aren't relevant to our company's setup.

"The design document is no longer a proposal to build consensus, bring people along with you, and refine ideas through slow, deliberate thinking"

I'm sorry but that's the last thing (almost last) I want to read.

I want an 'excellent summary' of the design including motivations and concerns.

Yes - the AI is bad at that but hopefully it will get better.

And I don't want to read the millionth iteration of some old man complaining about the kids these days, written by a human or not, yet here we are.

If you don't like AI slop. Don't read it. But wasting your time generating human slop to complain about AI slop is so obviously futile that it immediately identifies the writer as lacking the capacity for reason or emotional clarity, or merely seeking attention for their self-promotion with clickbait.

I’m fine with reading something you didn’t write if it has the information I need. I’m not fine with reading something you didn’t read and will just waste my time.

> I don’t want to live in a world where you use AI to summarize something important into unreadable text, and then I use AI in an attempt to decipher it. I want to hear you, imperfections and all.

It doesn't fundamentally change the equation if I use AI to prepare and then write it myself. If I'm using AI effectively, it's likely that you won't be able to tell.

This sort of post is increasingly coming off as high and mighty, where the user thinks they are being exceptionally creative and other people who are using AI are using it mindlessly.

As an educator in university I have found the project proposals of students have become longer, to some degree more well written and quite certainly have LLMs involved.

This becomes problematic when it turns out people haven't even read what they sent me.

To clarify: this is about voluntary projects that do not win them extra points.