Or I'll walk up to your desk and ask you to explain it.
It’s the asymmetric expectations—that one person can spew slop but the other must go full-effort—that for me personally feels disrespectful.
However, since people are not going to readily reveal that they used an LLM to produce said output, it seems like the most logical way to do this is just always use an LLM to consume inputs, because there's no easy 100% way to tell whether it was created by an LLM or a human or not anymore.
This kinda risks the broken telephone problem, or when you translate from one language to another and then again to another - context and nuance is always lost.
Just give me the bullet points, it's more efficient anyway. No need to add tons of adjectives and purple prose around it to fluff it up.
That way, thinking is communication! That's kind of why I loved math so much - it felt like I could solve a problem and succinctly communicate with the reader at the same time.
This has always been the case. Have some junior shit out a few thousand lines of code, leave, and leave it for the senior cleanup crew to figure out what the fuck just happened...
It's a breach of trust. I don't care if you're my friend, my boss, a stranger, or my dog - it crosses a line.
I value my time and my attention. I will willingly spend it on humans, but I most certainly won't spend it on your slop when you didn't even feel me worth making a human effort.