I’ve seen tons of them. I never denied the issue. It’s real, and it’s very annoying. But using the fact that AI generated articles exist to justify spouting uninformed opinions based on nothing but a headline is ridiculous.
Instead of reading a headline, assuming it means what you think it does and being wrong, then writing a comment based on that wrong opinion, you could at least glance at the article. You have enough time to write an angry comment, you can’t spend 10 seconds glancing at the article to see if it has any info that the 5 word headline might not have covered?
Or alternatively, if it’s such an imposition, then just don’t comment.
Lmao you didn’t even stop to read who you’re talking to. I’m not the one who wrote the opinion, and I said as much in my first comment. I don’t even agree with the guy.
At least now the downvotes make sense. Y’all are just having a reddit moment.
I saw that you were a different person, I don’t see how that’s relevant. You chimed in saying you also didn’t read the article because of your opinion that most articles now are AI generated nonsense not worth consuming. Nothing in your first comment said you didn’t agree with him at all.
I’d get it if the guy you replied to said “read the article, it’s super interesting!” and then you said “I didn’t read it because most text articles are AI generated nonsense so maybe that’s why they didn’t bother either” to add perspective.
But that wasn’t what happened. The OP spouted a nonsense opinion based off what he thought was going on, which was wrong, the next guy told him to read the article before running his mouth, and you chimed in to say “who reads articles, it’s all AI generated nonsense anyways now” which to me, comes off as a defense of spouting uninformed bullshit based off zero information.
"Maybe read the article. I know it’s too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read the article."
I’d get it if the guy you replied to said “read the article, it’s super interesting!” and then you said “I didn’t read it because most text articles are AI generated nonsense so maybe that’s why they didn’t bother either” to add perspective.
🤦♀️ “I’d get it if the guy you replied to said exactly what he said.”
The only one having a reddit moment is you mate, instead of admitting you posted a dumb comment because you didnt bother reading an article and didnt understand the context you keep pushing forwards attaking everyone. is it that hard saying: “hey, i’m wrong, i didnt read the article so i understood something different.”?
What is funnier is that you are not even the original op, but you obviously had the same thought process and felt attacked by being at that same level.
All I said was I wouldn’t blame him given the garbage state of news articles these days, and you guys took that opportunity to put words in my mouth so y’all could get on your high horse. And you’re still doing it after I said “I don’t even agree with the guy” lmao. If there ever was a “reddit moment” it’s this.
It’s also really funny how you wrote this as if I was the other guy, then had to edit in the last bit to make it seem like you didn’t jump to a conclusion after only reading the last sentence of my comment. The irony here is hilarious.
Yeah, at first i thought it was you the original op, because its funny how triggered you are, the difference is i was able to see i was wrong and edited my post. Anyway, keep salty and not bothering to read the most basic of stuff. Maybe you can think about it and see why you failing at first grade reading is why you are so trigger happy and tilted over anything.
Yeah, at first i thought it was you the original op, because its funny how triggered you are
Lmao, no, you thought I was “the original op” because you skipped everything about me not being him or agreeing with him, and only read the last sentence.
Maybe read more than 1 sentence. I know it’s too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read more than 1 sentence.
We literally had to create a bot to cut out all of the fluff in articles to make news these days more digestible.
Maybe read the previous comment. I know it’s too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read the entire comment.
Lmao fair, I didn’t read it at first. I did read it after the first guy responded, though, and I assumed you responded to something further down the chain
With all the AI generated garbage flooding text-based news, I didn’t bother reading it either. It’s a waste of my time 90% of the time.
I don’t even read comments anymore.
I’m convinced you guys just don’t read if you’ve never seen an article that’s blatantly loaded with fluff so you’ll scroll past more ads. Or maybe y’all are just that obtuse.
We literally had to create a bot to cut out all of the fluff in articles to make news these days more digestible.
I’ve seen tons of them. I never denied the issue. It’s real, and it’s very annoying. But using the fact that AI generated articles exist to justify spouting uninformed opinions based on nothing but a headline is ridiculous.
Instead of reading a headline, assuming it means what you think it does and being wrong, then writing a comment based on that wrong opinion, you could at least glance at the article. You have enough time to write an angry comment, you can’t spend 10 seconds glancing at the article to see if it has any info that the 5 word headline might not have covered?
Or alternatively, if it’s such an imposition, then just don’t comment.
Lmao you didn’t even stop to read who you’re talking to. I’m not the one who wrote the opinion, and I said as much in my first comment. I don’t even agree with the guy.
At least now the downvotes make sense. Y’all are just having a reddit moment.
I saw that you were a different person, I don’t see how that’s relevant. You chimed in saying you also didn’t read the article because of your opinion that most articles now are AI generated nonsense not worth consuming. Nothing in your first comment said you didn’t agree with him at all.
I’d get it if the guy you replied to said “read the article, it’s super interesting!” and then you said “I didn’t read it because most text articles are AI generated nonsense so maybe that’s why they didn’t bother either” to add perspective.
But that wasn’t what happened. The OP spouted a nonsense opinion based off what he thought was going on, which was wrong, the next guy told him to read the article before running his mouth, and you chimed in to say “who reads articles, it’s all AI generated nonsense anyways now” which to me, comes off as a defense of spouting uninformed bullshit based off zero information.
🤦♀️ “I’d get it if the guy you replied to said exactly what he said.”
The only one having a reddit moment is you mate, instead of admitting you posted a dumb comment because you didnt bother reading an article and didnt understand the context you keep pushing forwards attaking everyone. is it that hard saying: “hey, i’m wrong, i didnt read the article so i understood something different.”? What is funnier is that you are not even the original op, but you obviously had the same thought process and felt attacked by being at that same level.
All I said was I wouldn’t blame him given the garbage state of news articles these days, and you guys took that opportunity to put words in my mouth so y’all could get on your high horse. And you’re still doing it after I said “I don’t even agree with the guy” lmao. If there ever was a “reddit moment” it’s this.
It’s also really funny how you wrote this as if I was the other guy, then had to edit in the last bit to make it seem like you didn’t jump to a conclusion after only reading the last sentence of my comment. The irony here is hilarious.
Yeah, at first i thought it was you the original op, because its funny how triggered you are, the difference is i was able to see i was wrong and edited my post. Anyway, keep salty and not bothering to read the most basic of stuff. Maybe you can think about it and see why you failing at first grade reading is why you are so trigger happy and tilted over anything.
Lmao, no, you thought I was “the original op” because you skipped everything about me not being him or agreeing with him, and only read the last sentence.
Maybe read more than 1 sentence. I know it’s too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read more than 1 sentence.
So your plan is just to read headlines and make assumptions? I’m sure that will give you a much clearer insight into things.
Maybe read the previous comment. I know it’s too much to ask, but before saying stupid things, sometimes, it might be better to read the entire comment.
Mate, if you cared about your time, you wouldn’t argue on Lemmy under a post about something you didn’t even read.
I did read it. I said I wouldn’t blame him for not reading it given how much garbage is getting published.
But y’all love getting on your high horse over false assumptions 🤷♀️
🤡 🤡 🤡
Lmao fair, I didn’t read it at first. I did read it after the first guy responded, though, and I assumed you responded to something further down the chain