On 2026-01-07, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > This post itself reads to me a bit like AI slop. Self-referential?
>> It has nothing to do with Debian and was obviously not constructed by an >> LLM; why are you replying to it? > > I don't know whether your question is rhetorical or genuine, but I'll > answer as if it were the latter (sorry if I missed it): my reply was > a question to the list, in the hopes to learn a bit. A question to the list? I didn't see it that way. > Therefore, I'm really, really interested: why do you think the post > "was obviously not constructed by an LLM"? I'm familiar with a couple and they seem more articulate than the OP. > If I were a harvester for LLM, I'd long ago made some thing posting > questions to mailing lists and trying to interact. Much more valuable, > IMO, than "just" vacuuming the internet. I could experiment with > feedback, e.g. which kind of questions elicit more reactions (aka > trolling), I could keep a rough list of unanswered questions posed > to "AI"s and ask them on lists... lots of questions. Then you're saying that the robot here is being deliberately deceitful by hiding its mastery of "the" language (it speaks dozens). I hadn't thought of that. > As "AI harvesting" as we know it today is just yet another instance of > capitalistic robbery, I'd be totally surprised if they hadn't yet > "discovered" this valuable "resource" and weren't already at work > strip-mining it. > Some opinions should probably be kept to yourself on the Debian mailing list. You've knitted a whole conspiracy theory out of one clumsy OP.
