The AI writing taboo begins to fade following WSJ op-ed(www.semafor.com)
5 pointsby thm6 hours ago1 comment
  • bediger40006 hours ago
    The "AI writing taboo" wasn't a top down thing, the Chicago Manual of Style doesn't formally forbid it, it's more of a (true) grassroots thing, isn't it? I mean, I personally loath LLM-written text. If I begin to suspect that the putative author of an article had an LLM as load-bearing, I quit reading at the next sign of LLM-generation. I realize LLM text is as obviously AI written as it ever will be. I also hope that people who aren't billionaires or scammers will have their consciences nag them if they use LLMs to generate some crap.
    • 3 hours ago
      undefined
    • jaggs3 hours ago
      What happens if you use AI to generate good, if not great, stuff?
      • bediger40003 hours ago
        Me, personally? My conscience would nag me about it. I would feel that I was taking credit for something I didn't do, work I didn't perform, thoughts I didn't organize. I would also be reluctant to share it, given that I didn't do the work and the organization. I wouldn't be familiar enough with the generated text to stand by it. I wouldn't have learned enough during the generation to be certain of what it said. But that's me. Billionaires are different from me, and held to vastly different standards. Some of them appear to be profoundly dim, so maybe having AI generate "good" text would be of benefit to them, and to us.