> This content is fully generated by AI because fuck AI.
Maybe this is a language barrier, but what is meant by this sentence in particular? Why "generate with AI" (i.e. an LLM, most certainly not any form of "AI") if the author dislikes that so much? Wouldn't such a deeply held stance motivate someone to more heavily rely on consulting with experts in the fields of licensing and the current state of models rather than outsourcing such a project in its entirety to an LLM? In general, I can understand using an LLM for an initial draft when working on a project, then going over the output with some actual input from various expert sources, though not if one has major objections to the use and existence of LLMs in general. That just seems self-defeating.
Maybe this is a language barrier, but what is meant by this sentence in particular? Why "generate with AI" (i.e. an LLM, most certainly not any form of "AI") if the author dislikes that so much? Wouldn't such a deeply held stance motivate someone to more heavily rely on consulting with experts in the fields of licensing and the current state of models rather than outsourcing such a project in its entirety to an LLM? In general, I can understand using an LLM for an initial draft when working on a project, then going over the output with some actual input from various expert sources, though not if one has major objections to the use and existence of LLMs in general. That just seems self-defeating.
Or am I misunderstanding something?