If you're asking why people tend not to like folks using AI without saying so, it's because it feels dishonest when someone implies they drew/built/made something themself but had a computer do it for them. And a lot of people don't think using AI for something is real work, and question why they should care about something that its original creator didn't put much work into.
Of course, this does create a sort of catch 22 situation. If you lie about using AI and get caught, people will hate your work because you lied about it. If you admit to using AI, they'll hate your work because you used AI.
AI code is often fine. The point of the code is for the computer to do a job. And code is supposed to be consistent and boring and straightforward in its structure. AI is pretty ok at this.
AI is terrible at writing. Its prose is awful and horrendous to read. Plus, the whole point of reading a written piece is to hear about the author's new ideas or experiences. If AI wrote your piece it's both bad and pointless. I can also prompt the AI to hear what it knows about.
I hope these people are properly attributing their work to the IDE/editor they used as well. /s
I do spend an enormous amount of time working on projects with AI assistance. When people imply that my output is any less "worthy" because of that, it gives me pause.
The reality is that there are people using AI in areas they would have no chance of producing much quickly. I understand the sentiment against that kind of situation but one shouldn't assume that's every situation.
Its like someone reheating frozen food and saying I cooked it and they have not eaten it themselves and want me to buy it.
Honestly the noise problem is real. I usually just look at who is on the thread, the disclosure itself is rarely the deciding factor.
I don't want to talk to AI.
If you're asking why people tend not to like folks using AI without saying so, it's because it feels dishonest when someone implies they drew/built/made something themself but had a computer do it for them. And a lot of people don't think using AI for something is real work, and question why they should care about something that its original creator didn't put much work into.
Of course, this does create a sort of catch 22 situation. If you lie about using AI and get caught, people will hate your work because you lied about it. If you admit to using AI, they'll hate your work because you used AI.
Just so. You hit the nail on the head. Your second paragraph summed it up perfectly.
AI code is often fine. The point of the code is for the computer to do a job. And code is supposed to be consistent and boring and straightforward in its structure. AI is pretty ok at this.
AI is terrible at writing. Its prose is awful and horrendous to read. Plus, the whole point of reading a written piece is to hear about the author's new ideas or experiences. If AI wrote your piece it's both bad and pointless. I can also prompt the AI to hear what it knows about.
I hope these people are properly attributing their work to the IDE/editor they used as well. /s
I do spend an enormous amount of time working on projects with AI assistance. When people imply that my output is any less "worthy" because of that, it gives me pause.
The reality is that there are people using AI in areas they would have no chance of producing much quickly. I understand the sentiment against that kind of situation but one shouldn't assume that's every situation.