So, meta question: this post is implicitly endorsing the corporate executive idea that LLMs are just a necessary and normal part of “work” if you’re in software dev.
How am I supposed to tag that? It’s not LLM tooling. It’s not specifically about LLMs. Can we have a “slop apologist” or “clanker collaborator” tag? (edit: /s about the names, but not the concept)
It’s not that the key part of the post isn’t true, it’s the ridiculous base premise for the post.
How am I supposed to tag that? It’s not LLM tooling. It’s not specifically about LLMs. Can we have a “slop apologist” or “clanker collaborator” tag? (edit: /s about the names, but not the concept)
The entire point of the last loud meta debate was that no, we cannot. If you don’t like it, hide it and move on — that’s what the rest of us on Lobste.rs do when we see posts we happen to not like or not care about.
So, meta question: this post is implicitly endorsing the corporate executive idea that LLMs are just a necessary and normal part of “work” if you’re in software dev.
How am I supposed to tag that? It’s not LLM tooling. It’s not specifically about LLMs. Can we have a “slop apologist” or “clanker collaborator” tag? (edit: /s about the names, but not the concept)
It’s not that the key part of the post isn’t true, it’s the ridiculous base premise for the post.
So, how do I correctly tag this post?
score 1 · canonical
The entire point of the last loud meta debate was that no, we cannot. If you don’t like it, hide it and move on — that’s what the rest of us on Lobste.rs do when we see posts we happen to not like or not care about.
score 1 · canonical
If you can’t suggest an alternative or additional tag, the only thing left to do is to hide it or flag it (which additionally hides it).
score 1 · canonical
I literally did suggest an alternative tag. Two in fact.
score 1 · canonical