Just curious, what could they have possibly done instead that would satisfy you?
... not used an LLM to write their apology?
I mean, I'm satisfied. This indicates to me they don't care. That's all I need to hear.
There is no proof they used an LLM. Plus, LLMs are trained on human text anyway, who actually talk like this... it's not like LLMs invented their own way of speaking.
Would you have preferred no apology at all?
My preference is for companies to not use LLMs for public communication.
And, the scholarly applause of us anons, of course. ☝🏼
Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient
Just curious, what could they have possibly done instead that would satisfy you?
... not used an LLM to write their apology?
I mean, I'm satisfied. This indicates to me they don't care. That's all I need to hear.
There is no proof they used an LLM. Plus, LLMs are trained on human text anyway, who actually talk like this... it's not like LLMs invented their own way of speaking.
Would you have preferred no apology at all?
My preference is for companies to not use LLMs for public communication.
And, the scholarly applause of us anons, of course. ☝🏼