this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2026
228 points (84.5% liked)

Showerthoughts

40491 readers
935 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 110 points 1 week ago (7 children)

I read recently in an article something that struck me as the heart of it and fits.

"Generative AI sabotages the proof-of-work function by introducing a category of texts that take more effort to read than they did to write. This dynamic creates an imbalance that’s common to bad etiquette: It asks other people to work harder so one person can work—or think, or care—less. My friend who tutors high-school students sends weekly progress updates to their parents; one parent replied with a 3,000-word email that included section headings, bolded his son’s name each time it appeared, and otherwise bore the hallmarks of ChatGPT. It almost certainly took seconds to generate but minutes to read." - Dan Brooks

[–] stepan@lemmy.cafe 48 points 1 week ago (2 children)

That's something I've attempted to say more than once but never formulated this well.

Every time I search for something tech-related, I have to spend a considerable amount of energy just trying to figure out whether I'm looking at a well written technical document or a crap resembling it. It's especially hard when I'm very new to the topic.

Paradoxically, AI slop made me actually read the official documentation much more, as it's now easier than to do this AI-checking. And also personal blogs, where it's usually clearly visible they are someone's beloved little digital garden.

[–] saltesc@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

That's something I've attempted to say more than once but never formulated this well.

Did you try ChatGPT?

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Funny how people who's job it is to write can sometimes write gooder than us common folk.

[–] stepan@lemmy.cafe 4 points 1 week ago

funny for the writer elite maybe >:(

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I had this "shower" thought when chatting with a friend and getting an obviously LLM-generated answer to a grammar question I had (needless to say the LLM answer misunderstood the nuance of my question just as much as the friend did before). Thank you for linking the article, I will share that with my friend to explain my strong reaction ("please never ever do that again")

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 14 points 1 week ago

AI and someone who uses AI missed nuance? This is my surprised face. (- _ -⁠)

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 10 points 1 week ago

The most annoying part - the recipients email client probably offered to summarise with an LLM. My bot makes slop for your bot to interpret.

Its the most inefficient form of communication ever devised. Please decompress my prompt 1000x so the recipient can compress it back to my prompt.

I will say though, even a chatgpt email tells you a lot about the sender.

[–] BedSharkPal@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago

Damn. Nailed it.

[–] Yaky@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 week ago

The question I ask is "How do you justify saving your time at expense of others' time?"

Haven't heard a good answer, just mumbling "it can be set to be less verbose..."

[–] jjpamsterdam@feddit.org 3 points 1 week ago

Thank you for this great answer! It's something I intuitively felt but couldn't put my finger on with the same surgical precision you just did.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

Question: why does the linked lemmy.today "theatlantic@ibbit.at" show up here on lemmy.world (https://lemmy.world/c/theatlantic@ibbit.at), but there are zero posts visible in the community? I mean - since you commented from lemmy.today, we are clearly federated? I am confused - I wanted to comment on the article you linked with a question, but I can't find it via lemmy.world :(

Edit: Mhh... it seems I could send a federation request specifically for that community. I have done that, I hope someone will respond to it.

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Federation sometimes has a few quirks. Seems like you figures it out though

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's working now :) This was the first time I experienced having to subscribe to be able to see posts from a community. Still weird, but if I assume correctly that this works like the Usenet, if I unsubscribe again, now that the community is federated properly, the posts should remain visible to everyone @lemmy.world?

[–] mushroommunk@lemmy.today 2 points 1 week ago

That's my understanding but I've not played with it too much

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] DupaCycki@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think I'd prefer an unsolicited dick pick.

[–] irelephant@anarchist.nexus 10 points 1 week ago

If I wanted to ask chatgpt I would have asked it myself 

[–] morto@piefed.social 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Somehow, people don't get that if we ask something to them, it's because we want their personal interpretation of it, otherwise, we would use the internet as well

Specifically this - in terms of learning a language, understanding some nuances also absolutely requires an explanation by a native speaker that has a really good grasp of their language AND a talent of explaining. Both of which are criteria diametrically opposed to the average slop training data.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Sending SOMEONE ELSE'S dick pick at that.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 3 points 1 week ago

Sending a shitty AI representation of a dick pic.

there's that, too...

[–] Sunsofold@lemmings.world 9 points 1 week ago (3 children)

No love for LLMs from me but, flatly, no. Asking a question is soliciting a response. Their response is not the one you wanted, but it is solicited. It would be like you asking for a dick pic from someone, the penis of whom you were interested in seeing, and them responding with a generated image from one of the unfiltered image generators.
The intellectual equivalent to an unsolicited dick pic is probably spam advertising. A piece of media is being sent to someone who did not request it, by someone who does not care if the recipient does not want to receive it.

[–] Mohamed@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago

Totally agree. It's no where near the level of a dick pic - a dick pic is sexual harassment.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CallMeAnAI@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I mean on one hand, it's a shower thought. On the other, this is a really dumb shower thought.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] letraset@feddit.dk 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Receiving LLM output as an answer to a question, is the equivalent of getting a voice reply to the question:

"Quick question, are you free on Saturday afternoon?"

[–] jjpamsterdam@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I absolutely cannot stand the kind of people who answer a brief and simple yes or no question with a wall of text or a two minute voice note. If it's that complicated, because your pet chihuahua just had a stroke and you then fell in love head over heels with the veterinarian and that you're currently at the airport to fly away for your spontaneous honeymoon, just say no and tell me about the details in person.

load more comments (2 replies)

Downloading audio message... Duration: 45 seconds

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

At least a dick can be useful to create life... an LLM can never become life

[–] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Well, it's common courtesy that if someone is asking you, assume they already asked google or whatever and think you might have the answer they can't find.

That, and for some questions (i.e. nuances), a personal opinion is much more relevant to the asker than some random slop explanation. In this case I wanted to know which word construct in Turkish comes closes to the English "[ so and so ] is [ whatever ], isn't it?" vs. "[ so and so ] is not [ whatever ], is it?" - Because Turkish has "isn't it?" (değil mi? = not so?) but it doesn't have "is it?", mostly because "to be" is used much different in the language.

A google result wouldn't help me at all - the pure grammar answer is "there's no form of 'is it' to be coupled with a negative assumption/assertion". But does a language construct exist to transport the nuance of "the speaker assumes that something is NOT [soandso], and wants to ask confirmation" vs. the speaker assuming that something IS [soandso], and asking for confirmation.

I still don't know the answer, but it appears this nuance can't be expressed in Turkish without describing around it in a longer sentence.

[–] owenfromcanada@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I don't quite get the equivalence there. I'd say an LLM response is more on par with responding with a link to lmgtfy.com or something.

The intellectual equivalent of sending someone a dick pic would be a cold contact with LLM-generated text promoting or pushing something that you didn't otherwise show interest in. Or like, that friend from highschool who messages you out of the blue and you realize after a few messages that they're trying to sell you their MLM garbage.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Etterra@discuss.online 4 points 1 week ago

Reply: tell ChatGPT I said thanks.

[–] radicallife@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

But I have my phone's texting set permanently to respond with AI so I never have to talk to anyone.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Specifically if you don't even specify its ai, like I don't mind using it, but be upfront that you don't know and consulted an AI.

Like I see it happening at my work, people just straight copy pasting from copilot or w/e and it's clear to me that's what it is (especially if its discussing things I know that person has never heard of before lol)

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am slowly switching to increasingly less diplomatic reactions when I feel someone is using slop to respond to me or produce any kind of work text. Eventually I'll probably advance to offensive reactions à la "Are you so f*cking incompetent that you can't do better than copy-pasting into a glorified word prediction software?"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

my boss does this all the time. I just ignore it.

load more comments
view more: next ›