[bediger4000]

I tried it. Overall, LLM "AI" is not beating the stereotypes. The "honest" feedback is shallow, facile, surface level. Your "AI" concentrated on my use of Hugo 108, which is admittedly well behind the times, as some kind of security problem. That shows zero understanding. Hugo is a static site generator. My web site doesn't have much attack surface because it' a set of HTML files.

The LLM also doesn't exhibit any understanding of aesthetics or human motivation. Sure, my website jumps from topic to topic, but that's what I do. Maybe it's not marketable and doesn't have a coherent "brand" (whatever that might be). But so what? I'm not selling shit. I realize that humans are not clankers, and thus look for advice on LLDP one day, and discussion of Permian fossils another. Your "AI" would have everything be a median slurry that all looks and sounds the same. Which you should avoid. Your site looks pretty much the same as every other "AI" slop website.

I would also beg you to remove the beam from your own eye. Whatever weird beard generated HTML and JavaScript your "AI" site uses causes confusing jumping around while scrolling. The "branding" might be uniform and consistent, but so is oatmeal.

You should avoid using "AI" to create replies to feedback. The obtuse optimism doesn't indicate sincerity to readers, and further comes off as insulting and condescending. Any feedback is valuable, even negative, insulting feedback. Someone took time to write their answers to you, even if you didn't take much time to write the questions. Clankers should be grateful that humans stoop to reply.