The ai that’s been trained specifically to predict trends: ;3

Ah, that explains the lack of internal organs

Oh what the actual fuck did she do to Mickey Mouse

It’s the circle of life

We seem to be operating on very different frameworks of thought. I’ve made my case to you in its entirety and you are not satisfied with it, there aren’t any more details I can include that you might be missing, so I think that’s where this discussion ends. We simply have different values, and I’m ill-equipped with hard evidence to attempt to change yours. In any case, thank you for being so polite while we argued this subject. It’s nice to see other people trying to start a tradition of not blowing up at each other on these new social sites, unlike Reddit. I hope the next book you read is immensely satisfying.

I know this will sound really condescending, but you can sort entries by highest ratings on any good website. You do not actually have to browse through every single book ever made.

Curation is more than possible no matter what volume of titles there are. Review sites, recommendations, etc. are good places to start. I would rather spend 10 minutes for every book I read verifying that other people enjoyed it than one single book anywhere be judged unfairly just because the author is bad at dealing with publishers, or the book contains content that publishers would see as obscene or offensive, and is thus cut off from ever being read by a stranger.

Books that very few people enjoy are also going to be a lot rarer (even in digital copies) than books that many people enjoy. The creme of the crop is always going to be made pretty obvious.

What’s going to be remembered are the things that are truly worthwhile. I for one have no problem looking stupid in front of the other generations if it means there’s more creativity and knowledge being spread around.

I believe your view on this matter is due largely in part to the fact that so much content nowadays is easily accessible and quality control doesn’t happen behind closed doors nearly as much anymore. You are seeing with your own eyes a bunch of dumb shit that would usually get rejected by publishers instead of the general public. But if some are as bad as you say they are, then they’ll get rejected all the same. You really think someone in 50 years will be reading some trashy hunger games ripoff? No, they’ll be reading what’s actually worthwhile. With freedom comes choice, and with choice comes confusion and the option to choose wrong. I still prefer freedom. If you want to protect the sanctity of writing or something like that, support authors who you think do good work, don’t complain about the stupid ones.

“That’s the wrong email, my email is xxxxx@xxxxx . com”

Self abuse is still abuse! Give your pupper brain some enrichment!

Writing is an art, anyone should be able to do it and judge for themselves whether their work is good enough to share, and just because it’s been published doesn’t mean you have to read it. I would rather have to actively look for a book to read next via reviews than have what’s on the market mostly controlled by some businesses.

Fuck, we’ve been using them all wrong.

gasp!!!

All of those have (more or less) strict rules imposed on them to ensure the end recipient is getting reliable information, including being able to follow information back to the actual methodology and the data that came out of it in the case of journals.

Generative AI has the express intention of jumbling its training data to create something “new” that only has to sound right. A better comparison to AI would be typing a set of words into a search engine and picking the first few links that you see, not scientific journals.