r/LinkedInLunatics 16h ago

AI

Post image
57 Upvotes

41 comments sorted by

73

u/NonsignificantBrow 15h ago

The process seems a bit more complicated than actually typing a post on LinkedIn.

23

u/TokraZeno 11h ago

You're assuming that;

  • The poster is capable of articulating their thoughts in a coherent manner.
  • What the AI generated is what the poster meant to say instead of making that call after seeing the result.

3

u/1970s_MonkeyKing 9h ago

Have you seen his AI? It's sobbing on the shower floor, muttering, "unclean, unclean."

2

u/UnluckySeries312 8h ago

This what ‘scaling my insights’ looks like.

2

u/HillbillyAllergy 9h ago

It would be a shame if that post got 50000 AI-generated responses.

20

u/skawtch 14h ago

This one is out here claiming to be wisely using her time to post "motivational" and "inspiring" LinkedIn slop in the hope that a bunch of other business gremlins will circle-jerk in her comments. I don't think using AI tools is the problem.

3

u/BADoVLAD 10h ago

Business gremlins is my new favorite phrase. Also, I know you said it but I'm calling it as a band name. DIBS!

24

u/TheBostonTap 15h ago

Most posts written by AI are some of the most soulless and uninspired pieces of trash I've ever seen.

If you're arguing that it's still 100% you, then you need to reevaluate yourself.

8

u/Tormund_is_a_Pacer 12h ago

I work in executive recruiting. We write fairly extensive reports on all serious candidates. My younger staff members are now using AI to do it and not doing enough (any?) editing and customizing. I recently got two drafts to review from two different staff members on the same day, but for two completely different roles we are filling. Different levels of role, different companies, very different role substance, one very technical and the other less so.

I could barely tell the two reports apart. It was just flowery, soulless AI garble buzzwords. Provided basically zero meaningful insights into either candidate.

1

u/ToughAd5010 10h ago

Like where do you even go, you know?

At some point it becomes the norm but like….business lingo was already so formal buzzword to begin with

7

u/SidneySmut 13h ago

All is this sewage reads the same bc it's AI generated. There's nothing creative or unique. Any sewage miner can do it.

4

u/crooked_nose_ 15h ago

I'm glad he (like all the other idiots) told the reader the next part was how he did it. Without rhe "Here's how" I could never have worked it out.

6

u/RecognitionHefty 15h ago

I mean, you could skip that Otter thing. But then it wouldn’t be an ad of course, so no point in posting this on LI.

3

u/hlebicite 15h ago

She

1

u/crooked_nose_ 15h ago

She - whatever. Didn't bother looking to see who the lintic was. They are virtually identical.

3

u/CrzyMuffinMuncher 13h ago

I’m torn on this. It frustrates the hell out of me that so many people graduated from high schools and colleges with such shitty writing skills, so AI assisted writing helps keep me sane when reading their work.

However, the paradox is that if they learned to write while they were in school, they’d be able to whip out a quick and understandable note much faster than going through such a multi step process.

1

u/Tormund_is_a_Pacer 12h ago

Not to try and start the revolution from the bowels of this subreddit, but this strikes such a chord with me… Big Tech has convinced so many people their lives are better, and they could never go back to living without, technology that didn’t exist but for the last handful of years out of the 100,000 years that Homo sapiens have had modern brains.

Some things are fairly harmless but representative of the issue, like step counting smart watches and sleep scores. Do you need an app to tell you if you slept well or went on a walk? I have so many people in my life obsessed with both of those data points.

Unrestricted AI use on the other hand is an existential issue. Reading comprehension for 4th and 8th graders is lower than it’s been in 30 years and moving in the wrong direction. We’re outsourcing our brains to tech both in creation and consumption of information and becoming rapidly stupider. Smart people generally will still be smart, but the gap between them and average or below average intelligence people is rapidly widening. Which is how the people who are smart and have money and power and sit on top are only increasingly able to control and influence the world in their favor. Intelligence inequality is going to be the latest thing that just adds fuel to fires of income inequality.

2

u/Jaded_Individual_630 10h ago

She's such a smug asshole in the comments too

2

u/LateLecture620 10h ago

Reading her LinkIn profile is like watching paint dry.

Boring. Uninspiring. Bloated accolades. Same crap, different profile.

2

u/whatitpoopoo 9h ago

The hell is a Pavillion member?

5

u/UnluckyFriedChicken 15h ago

"This post is A.I but it's still me"

No it's not. If you write something you've written, if you haven't you haven't.

5

u/lykosen11 15h ago

Kinda agree with this one

With peace and love I'm calling notalunatic

Fuck the nonsense fully automated content. But I wouldn't hate on someone for using grammarly to make high quality content quicker.

2

u/hlebicite 15h ago

Maybe I’m the lunatic!!!?

1

u/HeyItsTheMJ 13h ago

I wouldn’t say Grammarly makes high quality content at all. I’ve been using the program for a few years now to help tighten stuff up—length, forgetting to put in a comma—but their AI stuff is still pretty bad. I’ve toyed around with that long enough to stay away from it. It doesn’t read context and their AI “checker” is still a massive joke.

It tells you almost everything you’ve written when it comes to academia sounds like AI. Even when you have it set for academia (I always, always fuck up APA and Grammarly laughs at me). You also can’t click sections to remove from being read as AI. My headings and subheadings are always grouped in.

It’s almost as bad as Turnitin.

1

u/FoolishConsistency17 13h ago

I tend to agree. I just read a bunch of cover letters and resumes that could have used a little AI. Of course, had they known what to ask it, they wouldn't have needed it, so maybe not.

-2

u/substituted_pinions 10h ago

Yeah. Too much of the anti AI backlash smells of early internet days reactionism. Give a smooth brain google access and get garbage. Matters how you use it, tbf.

1

u/writerlady6 13h ago

So it's a fallback if you graduated from high school, having failed to learn basic writing and communication skills?

1

u/Fan_of_Clio 13h ago

What she is spouting is the theoretical correct way to use AI. That's cute. That's not reality. The overwhelming majority copy and paste without bothering to do any editing at all.

1

u/fiso17 12h ago

This slop is so meta!

2

u/That-Importance2784 11h ago

Just when you think these people won’t be able to weasel out of doing a lick of work now they openly support doing even less work lmfao 🤣

1

u/Common_Exercise7179 11h ago

Here's a thought: 'fuck head?'

1

u/Raximnec 10h ago

I thought saturday was for satire...

1

u/Tieravi 10h ago

I saw this one, too!

1

u/angry_old_dude 4h ago

Almost everything that gets posted to linkedin is engagement bait bullshit. Whether someone does it all themselves or uses AI, bullshit is bullshit.

0

u/KakaoFugl 11h ago

What? Shes right, nothing wrong with using AI to write a post.

-1

u/ButMomItsReddit 11h ago

I don't know if it's lunatics. If it is, I'm a lunatic myself. Converting a rough draft into a relatively eloquent post is one of the top use cases of generative AI.
The whole different business is if the original thoughts are garbage. Then no amount of AI can help.

1

u/igneousscone Titan of Industry 9h ago

Editing a rough draft is a crucial part of the writing process, though? That's not even what OOP did--they fed a prompt into AI, used another AI to clean it up, and then barely edited the result.