Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Writing with LLM is not a shame

reflexions.florianernotte.be

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 155 posts

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#81

Post by pessimizer »

The problem with LLMs is that they write badly. If you want to use a LLM to write, prompt it with what you wrote and ask it to summarize concisely. If it doesn't understand what you meant, you should fix that part and resubmit (to a fresh context.)

The main reason, however, that one shouldn't "write" with LLMs is because it's a waste of everyone's time. If they wanted to know what GPT-5 thinks, they can ask it themselves.

edit:

> The problem is not the use of AI but the people how think they can, arbitrarily, criticize the work from someone else because he used or not AI in the name of “ethics”.

Ah, I didn't realize that the real problem is that people complain about it. If we can figure out a way to make those people shut up, then using LLMs to write for you would be perfectly fine.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#82

Post by matt123456789 »

When I put real time and thought into an email—and the response I get back is obviously AI-generated—and it comes with no disclaimer—it infuriates me. Maybe the model happened to spit out exactly what the sender meant—just dressed up and grammatically polished. Doesn’t matter—I’d rather someone talk to me directly than funnel a thought through a word-grinder and hit send. Downvote me—call me anti-progress—I don’t care. I cannot stand undisclosed AI in conversation.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#83

Post by nuancebydefault »

gred wrote: post #72
wfhrto wrote: post #8

At this point, it would be shameful to not write with LLMs. I don't want to spend time reading plain human text when improved AI text is an option.

That's a great point! Large Language Models (LLMs), like GPT-4, offer numerous benefits for writing tasks across various domains. Here’s a breakdown of the key advantages: 1. Enhanced Productivity Faster Drafting: Quickly generate drafts for essays, reports, emails, blog posts, and more. 24/7 Availability: Instant support with no downtime or fatigue. Reduced Writer’s Block: Provides starting points and creative promp…

Yes please go on

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#84

Post by godelski »

ath3nd wrote: post #29

Riding a bike with training wheels is also not a shame. If you need the training wheels, by all means feel free to use them. But LLMs are training wheels being forced on everyone, including experienced developers and we are being gaslit that if we don't use them, we are getting behind. In reality, however, the only study up to date shows 19% decline in productivity for experienced devs using LLMs. I don't mind folks…

This is a lot about how I feel (I wrote a longer comment too). Training wheels are fine but at what time do the training wheels come off? But maybe there's a more apt metaphor, since people who have been riding bikes for awhile don't use training wheels.

It's also fine to use tire chains when you're going through icy roads, but you have to drive much slower and should take them off when it isn't icy. It's about knowing the environment and conditions. Maybe some people don't need chains in that environment because they have winter tires (experience in our metaphor?). Sure, you can drive faster with chains on an icy road than you can without, but you still have to drive slow and be far more alert than you would when driving on a summer road. It is all about context.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#85

Post by satisfice »

The author of this piece commits a common mistake: analyzing AI use as if communication is nothing more than an isolated transaction. Instead communication is usually a process of creating and maintaining a relationship of some kind with other people.

Here’s a thought experiment: Imagine if I handed you a $100 bill and asked you to examine it carefully. Is it real money? Perhaps you immediately suspect it is counterfeit, and subject it to stringent tests. Let’s say all the tests pass. Okay, given that it is indistinguishable from a legit $100 bill, is it therefore correct and ethical for me to spend this money?

You know the answer: “not necessarily.”

This is because spending money is about more than a series of steps in a transaction. It is based on certain premises that, if false, represent a hazard to the social contract by which we all live in peace and security.

It seems to me that many AI fanboys are arguing that as long as their money passes your scrutiny, it doesn’t matter if it was stolen or counterfeit. In some narrow sense, it really doesn’t matter. But narrow senses are not the only ones that matter.

When I read writing that you give me and present it as your work, I am getting to know you. I am learning how I can trust you. I am building a simulation of you in my mind that I use to anticipate your ideas and deeds. All that is disrupted and tainted by AI.

It’s not comparable to a grammar checker, because grammar is like clothing. When an editor modifies my grammar, this does not change my message or prevent me from getting across my ideas. But AI is capable of completely altering your ideas. How do you know it didn’t?

You can only know through careful proofreading. Did you proofread carefully? Whether you did or not: I don’t believe that people who want AI to write for them are the kind of people who carefully proofread what comes out of AI. And of course, if you ask AI to come up with ideas by itself, for all we know that is plagiarism— stolen words.

Therefore: if you use AI in your writing, you better hide that from me. And if I find out you are using, I will never trust you again.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#86

Post by satisfice »

gred wrote: post #72
wfhrto wrote: post #8

At this point, it would be shameful to not write with LLMs. I don't want to spend time reading plain human text when improved AI text is an option.

That's a great point! Large Language Models (LLMs), like GPT-4, offer numerous benefits for writing tasks across various domains. Here’s a breakdown of the key advantages: 1. Enhanced Productivity Faster Drafting: Quickly generate drafts for essays, reports, emails, blog posts, and more. 24/7 Availability: Instant support with no downtime or fatigue. Reduced Writer’s Block: Provides starting points and creative promp…

This is AI bullshit.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#88

Post by mythrwy »

For code no, no shame as long as you understand it and agree. For internet comments or blog posts or emails ya, shame. In my opinion.

But I'm a native English speaker and (I think) a decent writer. But if I had to write something in another language I was only marginally fluent in I'd probably reach for an LLM pretty quickly.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#89

Post by pton_xd »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #77

AI prose is mediocre right now. Too verbose, indirect constructions, passive, etc. That being said, it's actually a great editor and can pick out all those issues consistently. My workflow right now is to use AI for rough draft and developmental editing stages, then switch AI from changing files to leaving comments on files suggesting I change something. It is slower than letting it line/copyedit itself, but models d…

AI prose has been mediocre since the release of ChatGPT. My layman's interpretation is there's just no strong creativity / humor / etc signals to train on, as compared to say math or coding. Current models are "smarter" so when asked to produce eg a joke they think harder, but the end result always misses the mark just the same.

Re: Writing with LLM is not a shame

#90

Post by CuriouslyC »

pton_xd wrote: post #89
CuriouslyC wrote: post #77

AI prose is mediocre right now. Too verbose, indirect constructions, passive, etc. That being said, it's actually a great editor and can pick out all those issues consistently. My workflow right now is to use AI for rough draft and developmental editing stages, then switch AI from changing files to leaving comments on files suggesting I change something. It is slower than letting it line/copyedit itself, but models d…

AI prose has been mediocre since the release of ChatGPT. My layman's interpretation is there's just no strong creativity / humor / etc signals to train on, as compared to say math or coding. Current models are "smarter" so when asked to produce eg a joke they think harder, but the end result always misses the mark just the same.

There's a difference between AI being bad at prose and storycraft. Good prose is totally achievable and it's just that it hasn't really been a priority for the tech shops, and I think they also often don't understand what makes really good prose so they're not good at optimizing for it anyhow. I expect given people's aversion to slop that the big laps will start to push hard on it soon and get their act together though.
Post reply on HN