You’ve already been told by someone else that this is not inaccurate and you are fully able to research it yourself. If you want to “raise the quality of discussion” please do so. So far I see very little evidence of that.
“The slop may happen to mostly be correct this time.” I’m glad you understand that now. There really isn’t anything else to discuss. This was never about AI Slop. That’s just a distraction.
You’ve already been told by someone else that this is not inaccurate and you are fully able to research it yourself. If you want to “raise the quality of discussion” please do so. So far I see very little evidence of that.
The slop may happen to mostly be correct this time. Did you actually follow it up and verify it was true before you posted it?
Or did you post a question to Google and copy out the LLM response as if it said something true?
“The slop may happen to mostly be correct this time.” I’m glad you understand that now. There really isn’t anything else to discuss. This was never about AI Slop. That’s just a distraction.
That’s all it’s about. I was never disputing your claim, but your methods.
No, this was about AI slop. People shouldn’t post AI slop.