AI this, AI that - you can't go anywhere without something trying to force AI on you. Usually a company trying to get you to buy into what they've wasted billions on. So indie devs have begun fighting back with their No Gen AI Seal.
What do you think grammarly is dude? Glorified spell and auto check, which people already utilize everyday. But of course new tools are looked down upon, the hypocrisy of people is amazing to see. It comes in cycles, people hated spell check, got used to it and now it’s prominent in every life, autocorrect, same thing is happening.
And now the same is happening again. If they want to claim no ai, no spellcheck, no auto correct, and no grammarly for emails. Everyone already uses “AI” everyday. But theirs is acceptable… okay…
Ok but why do you think it’s okay to use a wrecking ball for a task that requires a chisel? You’re creating low quality high cost work just because it’s fast and easy.
People ALREADY use an llm for spellcheck, and it’s acceptable, yet this crosses a line…? You say people won’t use one… yet it’s already been a thing for years, your ignorance is i ionic as shit here.
It’s always funny what people will find acceptable, but also balk at when it’s fundamentally the exact same thing.
Of these devs want to claim “no ai” and everything is human, than they can’t rely on spellcheck either. Both are automated tools no?
Grammarly predates commercial generative AI, as I attempted to explain to you before. It’s over a decade old. You clearly don’t understand the core mechanisms of any of these things.
You seem to be missing the point that’s been made here since your ignorance is “ai bad”.
A tools a tool, any tool can be abused. So it’s a very hypocrital view to say these tools are acceptable, but make up arbitrary reasons why those ones aren’t. That’s what’s being done here, and why people are trying to shift the conversation focus to the “tool itself”.
Since even photoshop, grammarly, or any other non-ai tool is labour a usable too.
If we want humans doing stuff, why is a brushing tool acceptable? It’s not a human doing the work. So yeah the views here are extremely hypocritical.
LLMs shouldn’t be used for spellcheck that would just be a massive waste of power.
What do you think grammarly is dude? Glorified spell and auto check, which people already utilize everyday. But of course new tools are looked down upon, the hypocrisy of people is amazing to see. It comes in cycles, people hated spell check, got used to it and now it’s prominent in every life, autocorrect, same thing is happening.
And now the same is happening again. If they want to claim no ai, no spellcheck, no auto correct, and no grammarly for emails. Everyone already uses “AI” everyday. But theirs is acceptable… okay…
Right but to detect close-enough spellings and word orders, using a curated index or catalogue of accepted examples, is one thing.
To train layers of algorithms in layers of machines on massive datasets to come up with close enoughs would be that but many times over the costs.
You would be a moron to use llms for spellchecking.
To clarify to you, not all programs are equal. Its not all different methods to do the same thing at the same cost.
A tool is a tool dude. Why are you trying to justify one over the other?
Ok but why do you think it’s okay to use a wrecking ball for a task that requires a chisel? You’re creating low quality high cost work just because it’s fast and easy.
Why do you think grammarly is a thing dude…?
People ALREADY use an llm for spellcheck, and it’s acceptable, yet this crosses a line…? You say people won’t use one… yet it’s already been a thing for years, your ignorance is i ionic as shit here.
It’s always funny what people will find acceptable, but also balk at when it’s fundamentally the exact same thing.
Of these devs want to claim “no ai” and everything is human, than they can’t rely on spellcheck either. Both are automated tools no?
Grammarly predates commercial generative AI, as I attempted to explain to you before. It’s over a decade old. You clearly don’t understand the core mechanisms of any of these things.
You seem to be missing the point that’s been made here since your ignorance is “ai bad”.
A tools a tool, any tool can be abused. So it’s a very hypocrital view to say these tools are acceptable, but make up arbitrary reasons why those ones aren’t. That’s what’s being done here, and why people are trying to shift the conversation focus to the “tool itself”.
Since even photoshop, grammarly, or any other non-ai tool is labour a usable too.
If we want humans doing stuff, why is a brushing tool acceptable? It’s not a human doing the work. So yeah the views here are extremely hypocritical.
bro just doesn’t get it, sorry you’re slow mate