Re: AI slop "contributions" to IETF working groups

[John Levine <[e-mail]>]

According to Nick Hilliard  <[e-mail]>:
>Are there any general IETF guidelines for how to use LLMs 
>constructively? (Or have I finally attained pure dinosaur status by not 
>hopping on the llm bandwagon?)

I think the answer to both questions is no.

My friends at the arXiv preprint server are overwhelmed with slop
manuscripts, to the extent that there are some categories where they
will only accept submissions from people who've submitted known good
papers in the past or are recommended by someone who has. This is a
widespread problem that we will have to deal with whether we like it
or not.

LLM slop mail isn't disruptive in the same sense that we've been
thinking about in the moderation discussion down the virtual hall from
here, but it's basically the same problem, messages that get in the
way of getting work done rather than contributing to it.

I suspect many of the people sending LLM slop think what they're doing
is fine, but that doesn't excuse it any more than it excuses other
kinds of disruptive behavior.

R's,
John
-- 
Regards,
John Levine, [e-mail], Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly