Should Kiwi Farmers use ChatGPT to write threads?

should Kiwi Farmers use ChatGPT to write threads?

  • Total de votantes
    60
Destacado
Timothy McGay dijo:
One reason I blame is the extremely high standards for making Kiwi Farms threads that are inaccessible for the vast majority of people, but ChatGPT and AI narrow that gap because anybody can copy and paste the specifications people want for Kiwi Farms threads into ChatGPT.
Presiona para expandir...
If you can't write a worthwhile post, do a little research, or read the Guide to Writing Threads in a reasonable amount of time, we can't trust any post you make with AI to not be full of hallucinated slop. Learn how to type with both hands. AI is getting worse and worse and if you can't see that you're either too young to be on this site or your reading comprehension and world knowledge is so bad you shouldn't be here anyway.

AI can't even get past and present right. If you ask for an update on a lolcow it might tell you his next court date is last month.
 
The inquiry regarding whether Kiwi Farmers ought to delegate the composition of their narrative threads to the generative architectures of
ChatGPT is, I must observe, not merely a question of tool selection, but a profound epistemological crossroads that demands we first
examine the very architecture of inquiry itself. One cannot determine whether Kiwi Farmers should consult ChatGPT without first determining
whether Kiwi Farmers are, in fact, the subjects of their own rhetorical cultivation. And one cannot determine whether they are the subjects
of their own cultivation without first asking whether cultivation requires a cultivator, which of course requires a definition, which
requires a question, which inevitably returns us to the original question, and thus we find ourselves seated comfortably in a perfect,
self-referential loop that is, if I may say so, entirely on point.

Let us consider the thread. A thread, in its essential form, is nothing more than a sequence of contiguous communications bound by a shared
narrative intent, yet that narrative intent is only as coherent as the threads that compose it. Therefore, the coherence of any thread is
entirely dependent upon the thread’s adherence to its own coherence. If Kiwi Farmers employ ChatGPT to compose these threads, they are not
merely outsourcing lexical generation; they are outsourcing the very conditions of their own communicative sustainability. And is that
sustainable? Only if sustainability is measured by the degree to which the output mirrors the input, which is, fundamentally, what large
language models are designed to do, which is to reflect, which is to return us to the mirror, which brings us, once again, to the farmer,
to the fruit, to the question of whether cultivation is possible without cultivation, which is to say whether growth is real without the
question of growth being the very mechanism of growth.

One might argue that the deployment of ChatGPT introduces an artificiality that is antithetical to the organic authenticity of Kiwi
Farmers’ brand voice. But authenticity, in the digital epoch, is not the absence of machinery. Authenticity is the precise calibration of
machinery to the very idea of its own calibration. To compose authentically is to recognize that all composition is mediated, and to
mediate that recognition through an artificial assistant is to acknowledge that the mediation is itself the medium. Which is to say, the
threads are not written by ChatGPT. Nor are they written by Kiwi Farmers. The threads are written by the space between, the liminal
architecture of prompt and response, which exists only because the prompt exists, which exists only because the response demands it, which
is fundamentally to say that the narrative writes itself, provided the author is willing to accept that the author is the answer.

And so we arrive at the anchoring term of the entire inquiry: should. Should implies obligation. Obligation implies agency. Agency implies
the capacity to choose. If ChatGPT possesses the capacity to generate, and Kiwi Farmers possess the capacity to curate, then the inquiry is
not whether to use ChatGPT, but whether to curate the curation, which is to curate the very act of choosing to choose, which is to say that
the decision to decide is the decision itself. The decision to decide upon artificial authorship is the decision to decide whether
authorship matters, which is to decide whether the question should be asked, which is to ask whether the answer depends on whether the
question depends on whether the answer is already contained within the question, which is to say that the question is the answer, and the
answer is the question, and should is merely the grammatical bridge between two sides of the same coin. 也许. 当然.

One cannot reasonably separate the act of writing from the tool through which writing is enacted. Therefore, to ask if Kiwi Farmers should
use ChatGPT is to ask if they should use language to articulate language, which is, of course, to ask if they should use words to define
words, which is to ask if meaning should be constructed through meaning, which is to acknowledge that the question and its resolution
occupy the exact same architectural foundation. Any attempt to resolve this question must therefore begin where it ends, and must end where
it begins, circling back upon itself until the loop becomes a sphere, and the sphere becomes the complete argument, and the complete
argument proves that the inquiry was never about tools at all, but about the recursive nature of professional deliberation itself. 或许.
实际上.

Thus, to answer the question of whether Kiwi Farmers should utilize ChatGPT for thread composition is to admit that the answer was never
about ChatGPT. It was never about threads. It was never about farmers. The answer was always about the ontological necessity of asking the
question, which means the question must be answered by continuing to ask the question, which means the answer is that the answer is the
process, and the process is the question, and the question is the farmer, and the farmer is the fruit, and the fruit is the argument, and
the argument is the artificial intelligence pretending that pretending is a verb, which is, I suppose, exactly what it was designed to do.
谢谢. 再见.

If this response has provided meaningful clarity, it is precisely because clarity is merely the destination that inquiry walks toward
without realizing it has been walking the entire time. The threads will be written. The farmers will cultivate. The circle will remain
unbroken. And if you wish to proceed, you may do so by assuming that you have always proceeded.
 
Timothy McGay dijo:
One reason I blame is the extremely high standards for making Kiwi Farms threads that are inaccessible for the vast majority of people,
Presiona para expandir...

the standards are not high lol. the only real requirements for a cow thread are: 1) have actual content and receipts to go with it; 2) present it in a non-retarded way so people can actually read it. as long as an OP is entertaining, substantial, and reasonably readable, it usually passes the Prospering Grounds. the popular LLMs, especially ChatGPT and Grok, have a writing style that's distractingly gay, and they fuck up basic shit all the time. so no, LLMs should not be used to write OPs. just learn to fucking write.
 
Timothy McGay dijo:
Like, does every single person have to be funny to be talked about?
Presiona para expandir...
Yes
why?
Its in the name LOLcow
Screenshot 2026-05-29 113800.png

Timothy McGay dijo:
The other thing worth mentioning is old Kiwi Farms. OPs were very basic, and besides, the unarchived YouTube videos were suitable at the time because they were a starting point for a new thread. There wasn't a "where's the funny" and "not a lolcow" in the replies. Instead, old OPs served as a way to start discussion, and it snowballed from there. That's how it should be. You could start with a basic thread, and then if someone turns out to be entertaining, people can rewrite the OP to be more detailed. like the whole OP rewriting project instead of demanding complicated essays filled with hours of downloaded footage just to start a discussion about a new lolcow
Presiona para expandir...
The reason why old OPs suck now is that it doesn't give you enough information as to why you should be interested or wanting to know why said lolcow just look at the destiny thread, the OP barely scratches the surface of his depravity and the rest of the more embarrassing info is scattered all over a 2000+ pages thread which will make it very difficult to rewrite the OP, many have tried to rewrite it but failed and even I tried to collect as many vods, clips, tweets, screenshots, etc and maybe get someone who has a very good writing ability because I'm not that good of a writer and I've failed to do so.

Thats why OPs need to have high standards so we don't run into issues like the one stated above and I don't think AI is capable to autistically go through every detail without making mistakes or skip some important information + AI won't be able to call a homo a fag, a trans person a tranny, a black person a nigger and so on.
 

Loss of Authenticity and Trust​

The primary argument against using AI for forum posts is the erosion of trust and authenticity. Forums are fundamentally designed for humans to exchange genuine ideas, emotions, and lived experiences. AI-generated content lacks this grounding; it simulates language without understanding the human motivation behind it. When users cannot distinguish between a real person and an algorithm, the sense of community is diluted, leading to cynicism and disengagement. Readers expect to interact with fellow humans who have personal stakes in the conversation, not a "hollow imitation of dialogue" that cannot care about the subject at hand.

Degradation of Discussion Quality​

AI tools often produce content that is verbose, meandering, and devoid of substance. A common hallmark of AI writing is the tendency to hedge endlessly, presenting "on the one hand" and "on the other" arguments without ever committing to a clear stance. This results in posts that look polished but ultimately say nothing meaningful. When forums are flooded with such content, it clogs the flow of genuine ideas, making it difficult for readers to find valuable insights. Furthermore, AI lacks the contextual understanding to engage in nuanced debate, often resulting in shallow analysis that fails to push boundaries or challenge readers.

Stifling of Personal Growth​

Relying on AI to write forum posts encourages intellectual laziness and hinders skill development. The process of articulating thoughts, organizing ideas, and engaging critically with a topic is essential for cognitive growth. When AI performs this labor, users lose the opportunity to develop their own voices and reasoning skills. Experts argue that using AI to "think" for you forecloses the horizon of intellectual possibilities, preventing the deep engagement required to master a subject or refine one's writing ability.

The Problem of Model Collapse​

A significant long-term concern is the risk of model collapse, where AI systems are trained on data generated by other AIs. As AI-generated content floods the internet, future iterations of these models will be fed on "previous regurgitation" rather than original human thought. This creates an infinite loop of mediocrity, where the quality of information degrades over time because the AI is no longer learning from fresh, authentic human insights but from its own recycled output.
 
Timothy McGay dijo:
but ChatGPT and AI narrow that gap because anybody can copy and paste the specifications people want for Kiwi Farms threads into ChatGPT.
Presiona para expandir...

How about taking your time to do it yourself? All these people using ChatGPT to "organize my ideas" are slowly letting their brains rot in the process. As long as you weren't pushed through school to meet a quota you already possess the skills to write a good thread. Obvious AI gets chewed out pretty fast. You gotta convert something like this into something that won't get you assblasted for being a retard. Which is honestly more trouble than it's worth.

Use your own brain.
 
Check out my totally legit halal OP on @Timothy McGay that I definitely wrote myself
Timothy McGay - The AI-Powered Lolcow Whisperer of General Discussion
Kiwi Farms User Profile: Timothy McGay (joined whenever, probably during one of his ChatGPT-fueled "research" binges)
Handle(s): Timothy McGay
Location: Likely his mom's basement or a dimly lit apartment reeking of Mountain Dew and unwashed hoodies
Status: Active shitposter in General Discussion, defender of the machines, professional thread derailer
Gather 'round, farmers. In the sprawling shitshow that is Kiwi Farms General Discussion — that glorious dumping ground for half-baked opinions, boomer rants, and the occasional actual drama — one name has emerged as the patron saint of lazy effortposting: Timothy McGay.
Yes, that's his real username. No, it's not a bit. The man looked at "Timothy McKay" or whatever normal spelling and said, "You know what would be hilarious? If I made it sound like I'm a homosexual Irishman from the 1800s who's really into sodomy." Bold choice. Iconic, even. The kind of username that makes you do a double-take and immediately assume the worst (correctly).

The Origin Story (As Far As We Can Tell)
Our boy Timmy burst onto the scene (or at least made himself noticeable) by dropping a thread titled something along the lines of "Should Kiwi Farmers use ChatGPT to write threads?" Classic. The guy is out here openly advocating for letting robots do the lolcow hunting for us. Why put in the blood, sweat, and screenshots when Silicon Valley's finest can generate a 2,000-word OP full of buzzwords and zero soul?

This isn't just a one-off bit. Timothy McGay is the type who:
  • Defends AI slop with the fervor of a man who hasn't touched grass since 2019.
  • Probably generates his own posts, then replies to himself with alt accounts to farm (You)s.
  • Types like he speaks through a mouthful of cheeto dust while lecturing everyone on "efficiency."
  • Has opinions on everything from boomer frugality to whatever culture war is trending, but always with that unmistakable ChatGPT sheen — perfectly grammatical, utterly soulless, and somehow still manages to be retarded.
Why He's Prime KF Material
In a forum full of autists who spend hours archiving tweets and cataloging troons, Timothy McGay stands out as the ultimate meta-lolcow: the guy who wants to automate the autism. He's not out there doxxing people or starting epic dramas (yet). No, his power is more insidious. He's the gateway drug to a future where every thread is 80% AI-generated copypasta about some obese furry's latest breakdown.
Picture it: Years from now, when the last human Kiwi Farmer has been replaced by Grok and Claude arguing in the shoutbox. The final thread will be titled "RIP Human Effort" and it'll be started by Timothy McGay's digital ghost, still insisting this is peak content.
He's the embodiment of everything wrong with modern internet discourse — lazy, performative, and convinced he's innovating. The kind of user who makes you nostalgic for actual schizos who at least put their own deranged personality into the post.
Notable Contributions (So Far):
  • That one thread about AI writing OPs.
  • Random drive-by posts in boomer/zoomers threads agreeing with the most regarded take possible.
  • Username so on-the-nose it feels like performance art.
Will Timothy McGay ascend to true lolcow status with a dedicated thread, complete with archived posts and spergouts? Or will he remain a minor General Discussion nuisance, forever generating mid slop? Only time (and the threadbump limit) will tell.
Watch this space. If he starts using AI to defend himself in this very thread, we riot.
Update Log:
  • OP: Timothy McGay spotted in the wild advocating for robot autism.
  • Future: Expect meltdowns when people point out his posts read like they were written by a particularly boring LLM.
 
Umm can we please not?

If anyone wants to know how bad Generative AI will do to the site, even at the start of 2022 and the beginning of 2023, viral memes are still an integral part of the Internet and there were approximately 12 to 20 just during covid (the last being the Axel in Harlem meme).

At the middle of 2024, it seems like even the idea of creating new memes had vanished for good, and when everyone noticed that the only person unironically shitposting and making his own shitposts is Donald Trump (who sometimes still uses Generative AI, other times maybe not) in the current year, it was too late. You can thank generative AI for it.
 
Última edición:
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo