I haven’t read any of the author’s other posts, so I don’t know if he is always this careful, but I do not mind the level of LLM assistance present in this post.

It becomes a problem when it is obvious that the LLM had a much bigger contribution to the writing, which is something that we do see a lot on posts here.

This is the same as LLM-assisted PRs (generally fine) and LLM-authored PRs (harmful).

AI is just another tool that allows me to go deeper into the accuracy of the story I am writing. In my last book I used AI notably to tell me how long a current state of the art (2024) computer would take to decode a cypher encrypted in a one time pad, if the cypher used the text in one of the ten most popular books available in world war 2; My guestimate was a bit off as it seems! Another time I gave it my draft blog and asked for it to fact check it. I also use it when writing to check my plot is not too similar to another that has already been written.

I usually give two different AI's the same prompt for nuance. My problem is still that they tend to drivel on, as if a one word answer is not good enough. Still I would rather have them than not.

I can definitely add this to the list of Headlines That Don't Make Me Click.