Live data from Hacker News

Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

wired.com

1–10 of 214 posts

Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#1
See also:

Grammarly is using our identities without permission, https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/890921/g..., https://archive.ph/1w1oO

Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
wired.com

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#3
The most interesting is the realization that if the LLM's input is only the output of a professional (human), then by definition the LLM cannot mimic the process the (human) professional applied to get from whatever input they had to produce the output.

In other words an LLM can spit out a plausible "output of X", however it cannot encode the process that lead X to transform their inputs into their output.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#4
post #3

The most interesting is the realization that if the LLM's input is only the output of a professional (human), then by definition the LLM cannot mimic the process the (human) professional applied to get from whatever input they had to produce the output. In other words an LLM can spit out a plausible "output of X", however it cannot encode the process that lead X to transform their inputs into their output.

Is it not possible for the process of input to output be inferred by the llm and therefore applied to new inputs to create appropriate outputs.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#5
post #3

The most interesting is the realization that if the LLM's input is only the output of a professional (human), then by definition the LLM cannot mimic the process the (human) professional applied to get from whatever input they had to produce the output. In other words an LLM can spit out a plausible "output of X", however it cannot encode the process that lead X to transform their inputs into their output.

Replace "LLM" with "student" and read that again. You don't just blindly give students output, you teach them, like what you are supposed to do with an LLM.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#7
Frankly, I am surprised this was not shut down by their legal counsel (assuming they have one and they actually asked). The legal exposure here is significant. This could be defamation, there are publicity rights issues, copyright, and maybe even criminal liability.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#8
This feels like a desperate attempt to stay relevant in a post-LLM world. They’re basically wrapping an LLM in a "professional" skin and calling it an expert review. The problem is that once you start letting an AI "expert" dictate tone and logic, you effectively lobotomize the writer’s original intent. We’re reaching a point where AI is just reviewing other AI-generated text, creating a feedback loop of pure mediocrity. Copium for middle management, if you ask me.

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#9
post #6

that's so scummy. why they even needs "names"? it's a rhetorical question...

Moreover, they don't even apologize:

"The work is public, hence the name. It's well known, it's in the data. Who cares".

What will they do next? Create similar publications with domainsquatting and write all-AI articles with the "public" names?

Is it still fair use, then?

Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers

#10
post #3

The most interesting is the realization that if the LLM's input is only the output of a professional (human), then by definition the LLM cannot mimic the process the (human) professional applied to get from whatever input they had to produce the output. In other words an LLM can spit out a plausible "output of X", however it cannot encode the process that lead X to transform their inputs into their output.

Is it not possible for the process of input to output be inferred by the llm and therefore applied to new inputs to create appropriate outputs.

Only if the LLM knows the inputs connected to particular outputs, pre-digital era or classified material might not be available, neither informal discussions with other experts.

Most importantly, negative but unused signals might not be available if the text does not mention it.

Post reply on HN