• tidderuuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    7 hours ago

    I pointed out a month ago that Ars Technica is a rot site and starting to be filled with AI regurgitated bullshit and got 80+ down votes and a few uneducated replies.

    Y’all feel better now?

    • sartalon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 hours ago

      No, the issue we are talking about today and calling Ars an “internet rot site” is a huge leap. Yeah, they post shit articles from Wired and such, (they are owned by Conde Nast), but their core writers are still great and have plenty of good articles.

      You want credit for what? Over exaggerating an issue then whining about it?

      You are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and then spitting on the baby. It makes no sense.

      • reddig33@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It’s been going downhill for some time. I think the Condé Nast investment pretty much killed it. The last site redesign that didn’t work correctly and made things unreadable was the last straw for me. I took it out of my rotation of “daily reads” and haven’t missed it.

      • dogzilla@masto.deluma.biz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        @sartalon @technology Yeah, I have a lot more trust in the reputation that Ars has built over a decade of solid reliable tech journalism than I do in a random matplotlib maintainer - I’ve interacted with maintainers before. They’re not wrong about agents, but not sure how that’s any different from any human doing the same.

    • ageedizzle@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Stuff like this makes me very sympathetic to lemmy instances that disable downvotes