Spam = unwanted and against what you asked for, trying to sell you something or get you to do something

Slop = technically what you asked for, but intentionally created just to fill space and increase traffic/hits, generally of the lowest quality rendering it unusable

Then, to me, it's spam. The only times I've asked for fake text generated by a computer I stitched together some markov chain library and a corpus myself, and then it was to make the point that some people are so badly affected by ads and political propaganda that their contributions to the texts of humanity could easily be replaced by my code.

The problem is that sometimes slop looks like content from a far enough distance. And to the untrained eye, it is indistinguishable from real content. For example, a Kafka tutorial could start with pages about other irrelevant technology before getting to the real material. But you wouldn't know which content is useless at first.

Could you define "content"?

Ok, think about it like this. It's your anniversary with your partner so you decide to commission a drawing from an artist as a gift. However, when you receive it, it's clearly an AI-generated image that was printed out.

Would you still consider that "spam"?

Yes. I also call the music-reminiscent sounds played in shops in malls spam.

Sounds like you'd prefer to interpret slop as being a subset of spam. So all slop is spam but not all spam is slop.

Our brains have been under attack for years. Zuckerberg, Dorsey, and company have already spent decades and billions doing just that. With capabilities already in the AI realm.

Still can’t decide how terrified should I be that somehow zuck is the good guy in the AI wars.

No clue what would give you that idea.

llama3

I recently lived in Portland when a teen was killed by a car in the southeast part of the city. The guy fled back to Saudi Arabia and no semblance of justice occurred. In the real world, vehicular crimes are seen as just a part of life. Consider the common term "car accident" and the absolving of responsibility it implies.

Even your statement shows how deep the absolution of drivers is - a driver killed the kid. Though they’d face no consequences in the US either

How does the saying go? If you want to kill someone and get away with it, kill them with your car.

Safari users are not necessarily wealthier than Firefox users. Apple skews more mainstream and Firefox skews more techies.

Sure but let's see average user data first before making these claims. Aren't Apple products popular among kids? Kids are usually poor and would bring the wealth average down.

But kids often have parents who aren't poor. IIRC children's toys are a pretty profitable and segment.

The point is wealth per user, not potential wealth per user. Parents don't always buy their kids the same high grade devices that they use.