Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #135714

Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C)

Show all headers | View raw

On 11-09-2026 20:31, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:
> Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> writes:
>> On 31-08-2026 15:17, Kragen Javier Sitaker wrote:
> That’s true — etiquette is rarely a product of moral philosophy, having
> more to do with group social dynamics than with metaphysics.

Wow! That's a lot of eloquent words for such a humble person. You know, 
often such words are used to mask peoples own ignorance on the matter. 
And I suspect that's the case here.

Now tell me -- what has manners to do with the fundamental structure of 
reality. And if you wanna go into group dynamics, these are arbitrary by 
very nature. Or at least closely related to contract ethics -- if you 
insist on membership of a group.

So-- exactly what is the purpose of this statement? It's just a load of 
tautologies!

> The claim of Martsinovich that you’re alluding to is that
> people who post AI slop will suffer reputational damage due to their
> “laziness”, because the people who read it feel violated.  You seem to
> be conflating those two roles.

True -- but who cares? People who spread untruths are facing the same 
dangers. People who claim zodiac signs show 'whodunnit', ditto. There 
are countless ways to have your reputation damaged. In far more evident 
ways than  Martsinovich claims. And let me note, *none* of this is based 
on any reliable data. Pure 'cargo cult science'.

> There are just too many such claims for that to be practical. 

Figures my dear, figures. When I pose a comment on an average YT, you 
can be assured I've read enough for the next two comments to come. And 
if I can do it, everybody else can. Unless you're lazy and ignorant of 
course. And ignorance is *never* an excuse.. Not in the days of the 
Internet.

> Debates where all participants are expected to spend their scarce human reasoning
> power rebutting AI-generated claims will simply vaporize the moment an AI slop volcano is directed at them.

"Slippery slope" logical fallacy. Try again.

> And it seems like there are a *lot* of people who agree with
> Martsinovich’s point of view.

"Bandwagon" logical fallacy. You're not getting much better.

> In case you’re referring to me, at the risk of descending into ego
> defense, I did in fact counter six false claims in the original message,
> using my already-gathered information and knowledge, exactly as you are
> recommending.  So, if that’s what you meant, I think you’ve got the
> wrong guy.  But I don’t plan to do that in every case, because it’s
> impossible.

You want a medal for doing your homework? As you're supposed to do? 
Given the number of logical fallacies in this piece alone, I'm not so 
sure you're the wrong guy.

Your major error was to list a mere opinion piece as your sole argument. 
I don't care what people think, I only care about what they can actually 
prove.

And some nitwit trying to force his opinion onto the world, without 
*any* supporting data is *not* "proof" by any measure in my book. Maybe 
the saddest thing is that certain people take him serious. So much for 
critical thinking.

Gee, what is the world coming to..!

Hans Bezemer

Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Only Forth For Livecheck, No C Terry Porter <techman001@eternal-september.org> - 2026-08-30 03:09 +0000
  writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-08-31 09:17 -0400
    Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Terry Porter <techman001@eternal-september.org> - 2026-08-31 21:39 +0000
      Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-11 14:30 -0300
        Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Terry Porter <techman001@eternal-september.org> - 2026-09-12 09:36 +0000
    Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2026-09-01 07:59 -0400
      Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) marcel hendrix <mhx@iae.nl> - 2026-09-01 13:34 -0400
        Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) dxf <dxforth@gmail.com> - 2026-09-02 17:08 +1000
        Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-02 11:52 -0400
          Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-09-02 20:09 +0200
      Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-01 13:34 -0400
    Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2026-09-07 12:43 +0200
      Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-11 15:31 -0300
        Re: writing style with AI (was Re: Only Forth For Livecheck, No C) Hans Bezemer <the.beez.speaks@gmail.com> - 2026-09-15 19:58 +0200

csiph-web