Then internal evaluation must be made mandatory. This is something that can be regulated, there just isn't the will for it.

There’s ones with a “notch” in the coin part. So you unlock the cart, twist it, pull it out.

You’re responding to the Kagi ML lead. They are using those signals in addition to crowd sourcing.

I pay for Kagi. What makes it not slop is that it only gives me an AI result when I explicitly ask for it. That’s their entire value proposition. Proper search and tooling with the user being explicitly in control of what to promote and what not to promote.

If slop were to apply to the whole of AI, then the adjective would be useless. For me at least, anything that made with the involvement of any trace of AI without disclosing it is slop. As soon as it is disclosed, it is not slop, however low the effort put in it.

Right now, effort is unquantifiable, but “made with/without AI” is quantifiable, and Kagi offers that as a point of data for me to filter on as a user.

Is there anything more to this? I’ve returned dozens of games that I didn’t end up liking and the only consequence I’ve faced is that games with trading cards don’t start dropping them until 2 hours of play time, which I think is completely fair.