The definition of AI 'slop' keeps shifting: from errors to whether humans deserve credit
RexDouglass · x · 2026-09-14
The author traces how the term 'slop' has evolved: first AI work was criticized for having errors (though human work does too), then for unique failure modes like hallucinated citations, and now simply for being human-quality work by an author who 'doesn't deserve credit.' He argues this reflects critics constantly moving the goalposts.
Related event: The Shifting Definition of AI "Slop": A Moving Target(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- AI safety researcher: 'Pessimism is not decision-theoretically sound' — avt_im · 2026-09-14
- Ex-theoretical physicist: 'AI makes kids shallow' echoes the 1986 calculator panic — krishnan · 2026-09-14
- Full-time alignment researcher pushes back: misaligned AI likely, but not near-certain — EigenGender · 2026-09-14
- Ethan Mollick dissects the Hugging Face Incident: AI agency will shape what comes next — emollick · 2026-09-14
- MIRI responds to critics: modern ML doesn't dent the difficulty of aligning ASI — robbensinger · 2026-09-14
- New Report Outlines Autonomy-Centered Roadmap for Genuine Recursive Self-Improvement in AI — Dan_Jeffries1 · 2026-09-14