I don't think it's correct to flag submissions solely because have incorporated AI in the main content. Many engineering projects incorporate AI (sometimes very heavily), and many of them are still interesting and useful. And the guidelines say nothing about submissions having to be human-made.
However, I do think it's correct to downvote and perhaps flag submissions that are supremely un-useful.
These AI-generated websites often lack margins on the left and right of the text, which looks bad on smaller screens. It seems creators don’t care about testing on smaller devices.
Some of us don't want to cater to the dumbed down version of a real computer. You could even say it is something of an stylistic, nay--artistic choice.
Couldn't find the about section. If you want users to invest their time just be honest about yourself, your goals for making the site and your tech stack.
Obviously it is AI assisted design, but that dosen't mean it has to be shit.
Actually the ultimate combo would be to learn this with the learning mode tools provided by AI providers.
I must say that it really is a super interesting and efficient way to learn.
Any of you tried them ?
I really think people should learn first and primarily from books written by people. Think about it: the LLMs are trained on that data. So they cannot actually be better than the best original texts. Get good quality original books then learn them in conjunction with AI, but don't try to learn using this. How to downvote?
reply