Where and How to Spot LLM Slop
Naming some of the remaining culprits
Yesterday we had a lengthy conversation about slop and how to tackle it, both in news sites and in code (where codebases can be contaminated by people who do not or cannot understand what code they submit/commit to projects). Yesterday we also saw a report about allegations of LLM slop inside the New York Times, which had sued LLM companies for plagiarism.
In Google News, as of last night we don't see many slopfarms, only these two:
Linuxiac is there also, but it seems to be a hybrid of slop and Bobby (sloppy Bobby?) and the same goes for UbuntuPIT, which had a couple of new articles that both seem at least partially sloppy. linuxteck.com yielded one new sloppy article (less than before; "Linux Bash Scripting: Automate Your Server in 2026"), as did linuxsecurity.com ("Linux Vulnerability Could Let Attackers Take Control of Systems and Disrupt Services"). The upside is that the slop about "linux" seems somewhat confined to particular domains and is hardly spreading. Many people correctly perceive LLMs as a site's downfall, a step towards the abyss.
At this point it's important to keep track of which domains (or authors) engage in plagiarism by LLMs. If they receive no traffic, then sooner or later they will stop. █