Today I came across an announcement of a new package that turned out to be hundreds of words of LLM slop. It was unbearable. Other fora have a hard rule against LLM-generated postings or comments, and they benefit from it. There are automated tools that detect LLM garbage with over 90% accuracy. Th…

Except that it is not well structured, using bullet points does not imply structured writing. If you were to give me a snippet of your conceivably good AI output I am pretty sure I could rewrite an entire paragraph into one a single cogent sentence. The problem with AI prose is simply that it’s bad…

In my opinion folding posts into an expandable container once they reach a certain length would already go a long way

I just read the Guidelines (for the first time!) and I see nothing there about English or any other language having an official status (although the fact the that Guidelines are written in English might suggest that). Given that, why are we implicitly treating non-English as “foreign”? It would neve…

Why not both? I like the flavour text to be human written. But if it’s a list of features or a migration guide, i much prefer the LLM output. It’s much more thorough and precise. For telling a story around the features and the release definitely a human. I’ve been combining both in my announcement…

[image] kahliburke: I personally don’t align with this statement about lacking judgement, because I believe we are still talking about humans who choose to click the post button? The question therefore is not about the “judgement” of the LLM, they don’t possess that. The person contributing to t…

I held off on commenting, and I won’t bother catching up on 80+ comments, but I’m glad this topic got debate and controversy. LLM detection has little empirical validation and is inundated by its own biases and myths (one accuracy score is ridiculous for a situation with false positives and negative…

[image] mbauman: It is true that I had been turning a blind eye to package announcements and changelogs Maybe it’s interesting to think about why I had been doing this. I was asked on Slack a few weeks ago and I didn’t really have a solid answer… but this comment made me realize a bit more: …

I think the borderline antagonistic back-and-forth on LLM summary capabilities and our opinions of such is missing the point. We can assume LLMs are perfect, and the disconnect between people is still the fundamental problem. To put it politely, I have observed a rise in the LLM era of infodump ANNs…

[image] gwr: I am quite often interested in good content and do not care how it was produced. This gets solved by attribution. Indeed, attribution makes the reply even better: It tells people how they could have figured out the answer themselves. Recall the ancient “let me google that for you…

[image] gwr: If a company can afford lots of specialists (including communication specialists), who can also converse with each other, and these people each have an account on Julia Discourse, why should they be ok to make use of this “communication power” The Julia discourse isn’t a competit…

I don’t want to read LLM output

Meta Discussion

Topic		Replies	Views
Updates to the site guidelines, especially regarding gen-AI Meta Discussion	39	1458	September 11, 2026
chatGPT policy needed? Meta Discussion	39	3824	December 22, 2022
Anthropic gave me 6 months of Claude Max for my contributions to the Julia ecosystem :) Offtopic ai	73	3600	August 12, 2026
Let's allow AI output in some restricted sense Meta Discussion	3	349	September 12, 2026
Non-native English speakers and the use of language assistance Community question , policy	42	1216	May 21, 2026

I don’t want to read LLM output

Related topics