And now to prove it I will have plenty of down votes on this comment.

I switched an upvote to a downvote after reading this last sentence, so it doesn’t really prove anything.

When you read "slop" you are simply reading the words of someone who doesn't live in in your constructed narrative.

Tell me more?

when someone reads slop, youre not reading human work. i dont contruct the narrative of who is born into exsistence, and who is not. I must not understand what you mean by these words.

Deconstructing the premise from first principles:

except the healthy and truthful facts stand doesn't and never did exist.

• False: Bodies of recorded objective facts such as encyclopedia and scientific papers exist.

If it did it would be simple to train a healthy and truthful facts AI, you would simply train it off from the truthful and healthy facts.

• Logical fallacy: Assuming the antecedent, the first premise must be proved before a conclusion can be drawn.

but everyone makes up their own narrative until all written word appear relative to the AI, making it impossible for the ai to tell fact from fiction.

• Opinion. Artificial intelligence is designed to reproduce patterns. If you presume your prior premise was true, a "facts trained" AI should in theory have been able to distinguish truth from falsehood.

When you read "slop" you are simply reading the words of someone who doesn't live in in your constructed narrative.

• Conflation: "Slop" is a pejorative term for all content generated by artificial intelligence, but particularly low quality, sloppy, one.

And now to prove it I will have plenty of down votes on this comment.

• Logical fallacy: Strawman. Constructing a poor argument in order to prove it is, itself false, at best, a waste of time.

Overall truth value: 16.17% (Mostly misleading/inflammatory comment)

If it did it would be simple to train a healthy and truthful facts AI, you would simply train it off from the truthful and healthy facts.

Not how AI works. I mean, it's technically possible to train an AI that only generates truth, but it would be so overfitted that it's functionally no different from the search bar on Wikipedia.

Large language models need randomness to function. They cut up every true sentence in the training data into tiny tokens and reassemble them into... well, whatever arrangement of tokens satisfies the discriminator or the humans who grade the output. Discriminators can't tell fact from fiction and the humans generally don't care to.

Even if you valued truth above all else during the training and rejected every false statement you encounter, there's no way you could judge the truth of every possible statement the system could ever produce. And with randomness most statements will be false, that's simply the nature of truth.

i’m 14 and this is deep

ignorance is bliss... as they say..

Nooo, don't you see? There's no soul!

AI just copies from the foundations laid out by humans and applies the idea in the prompt.

But humans diligently study their predecessors and use it to pursue their own unique idea.

Artists are super special unique divine transcendent souls creating objectively meaningful works!