I'm all for it if it'll stop people from commenting about things being AI slop or vibecoded and comes with a new guideline discouraging said comments.

Fair enough. If the substance reads generic, that’s on me.

The intent wasn’t to produce volume, it was to frame the economic layer of the discussion. Whether written with or without AI assistance, the argument still stands or falls on its logic.

What’s more interesting to me is how quickly “AI slop” becomes shorthand for structured reasoning. As these tools become common, separating low-effort output from thoughtful analysis is going to matter more, not less.

Ironically, this ties back to the original question about bubbles. If AI-generated content becomes abundant and cheap, signal will only survive where there’s clear economic or technical grounding behind it.

I’m spending a lot of time thinking about that boundary right now, especially in developer-facing systems where quality and constraint adherence actually matter. The difference between fluff and production-grade behavior is becoming very measurable.

Curious how others here distinguish between shallow AI-assisted output and work that’s actually grounded in systems thinking.

There must be a misunderstanding.

I'm saying I dislike the constant "this is AI slop" and "this is vibecoded" complaints on posts. I see no value in them and I wish they'd stop.

I'm saying nothing about the use of AI in generating content.