Post

plato.stanford.edu Intentionality (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

John, It's still not writing. Generated text lacks intentionality. plato.stanford.edu/entries/inte.... What you want from generated texts sent to you by others actually is variance not terseness. LLMs are on verbose mode to consume tokens and generate cash for their owners.

It doesn’t really sound like you read the linked post…

Kathy Tafel

@kathytafel.bsky.social

en.wikipedia.orgChinese room - Wikipedia

Gruber's or The philosophy page? I philosophically disagree with Gruber. But then I studied Intentionality in Philosophy of Mind at UC Berkeley. and subscribe to the en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese... POV. (Though I think the name is a bit unfortunate.)

Gruber’s. I agree with your point on intentionality and am not trying to undermine your expertise. I agree that in general obviosuly LLM written text is awful to read. But that’s also not really what Gruber’s point is here

Kathy Tafel

@kathytafel.bsky.social

no, he's just calling LLM generated text writing, and I disagree that it's writing. it's math.

I think there’s a compelling argument there. Especially once you dig into other things like ai generated image slop. That being said, it’s a little besides the point imo. Once someone has written something (or generated it) in the end all I care about is if it’s good or bad.

21/8/26, 5:53 pm0 reposts1 like

If someone has clearly used an LLM to write a post, it’s usually dogshit and I hate reading it. But if they’ve used it and I didn’t notice, was that really all that bad? My experience is unchanged, the knowledge I’ve consumed remains the same.