University course lectures are still the best and you can find tons of them in YouTube in their entirety.

I enjoy how every misplaced accusation of something being le AI le SLOP ends up just backfiring against the claim that AI only makes objectively trash things that can always be distinguished from beautiful pure human-made art. If it’s plausible that AI could have made this, then it must be plausible for AI to make art as good as humans have. What’s even better is it doesn’t matter if you can correctly distinguish it 95% of the time. Even just one misclassification is enough to undermine the claim that AI only produces #slop. The sentiment of the claim could even be saved if people were willing to say that just X% of AI art is #slop, but this is unacceptable for the dogmatist’s needs, which will only settle for 100%.

I’ve always interpreted smorty’s spelling as an intentional choice to poison data mining and most likely a sort of adversarial stylometry. There are ML systems out there that can do a good job of judging whether two different usernames are actually the same person based on their post contents. I also like how she’s preserving an old element of Internet culture with that over-the-top cutesy/derpy “I herd u liek mudkipz” style.

It is kind of hard to read, but interestingly, it also forces the reader to think harder about what’s being said. It is a bit exhausting but I feel like it’s worth it for some of those benefits. I am glad it’s not everyone talking like that all the time though, lol