[ojosilva]

This. There's just as many human commenters and content creators that generate plenty of human slop. And there are many AI produced content that is very, very interesting. I've subscribed to a couple of newsletters that are AI generated which are brilliant. Lot's of project documentation is now generated by AI which can, if well-prompted, capable of great docs that are deeply rooted in the code-as-primary-source and is eadier to keep up to date. AI content is good if the human behind it is committed to producing good content.

Hack, that's why I use Chatgpt and other LLM chat, to have AI generate content taylored for my reading pleasure and specific needs. Some of the longer generations of AI research mode I did lately are among my personal best reads of the year - all filled with links to its sources and with verified good info.

I wish people generating good AI responses would just feel free to publish it out and not be bullied by "AI slop detectors by Kagi" that promise to demote your domain ranking. Kagi: just rank the quality and veracity of the content, independently of if it's AI or not. It's not the em-dashes that make it bad, it's the sloppy human behind the curtain.