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

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

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 214 posts

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

#21

Post by simianwords »

drbig wrote: 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.

i don't get what the point of what you are saying is? i can ask it to explain how to solve an integral right now with steps.

i can ask it to tell me how to write like a person X right now.

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

#22

Post by DonHopkins »

ErroneousBosh wrote: post #14
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You can't "teach" an LLM. It can't think. It's a simple pattern-matching algorithm, basically just an Eliza bot with a huge table of phrases.

You're not thinking, just regurgitating catch phrases that are factually incorrect hallucinations. So how are you any better than an LLM?

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

#23

Post by simianwords »

whizzter wrote: post #10
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

challenge: provide a single example where the LLM can only provide the output and not the steps? (in text scenario)

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

#24

Post by bayindirh »

himata4113 wrote: post #18

Grammarly seemed pretty dead on arrival the moment they added AI features. They would have said a lot more relevant and kept the costs down if they were strictly no-ai imo.

The funny thing is, their core "grammar" engine has to work on a language model + some hard heuristics anyway. So they were on a path to utilize this thing for real good, with concrete benefits.

Generative AI is a plague at this point. Everybody is adding to their wares to see what happens. It's almost like ricing a car. All noise, no go.

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

#25

Post by bonoboTP »

KeplerBoy wrote: post #16
shafyy wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enough with this analgoy. It's flawed on so many levels. First and foremost, stop devaluing humanitiy and hyping up AI companies by parroting their party line. Second, LLMs don't learn. They can hold a very limited amount of context, as you know. And every time you need to start over. So fuck no, "teaching" and LLM is nothing like teaching an actual human.

It all went south when we started to call it "learning" instead of "fitting parameters".

It was called learning already back when the field was called cybernetics and foundational figures like Shannon worked on this kind of stuff. People tried to decipher learning in the nervous system and implement the extracted principles in machines. Such as Hebbian learning, the Perception algorithm etc. This stuff goes back to the 40s/50s/60s, so things must have gone south pretty early then.

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

#27

Post by Imustaskforhelp »

Man I really don't like this at all.

It really feels so wrong to spare nobody, not even dead writer/people.

All it's gonna do is something similar to em-dashes where people who use it are now getting called LLM when it was their writing which would've trained LLM (the irony)

If this takes off, hypothetically, we will associate slop with the writing qualities similar to how Ghibli art is so good but it felt so sloppy afterwards and made us less appreciate the Ghibli artstyle seeing just about anyone make it.

The sad part is that most/some of these dead writers/artists were never appreciated by the people of their time and they struggled with so many feelings and writing/art was their way of expressing that. Van Gogh is an example which comes to my mind.[0] Many struggled from depression and other feelings too. To take that and expression of it and turn it into yet another product feels quite depressing for a company to do

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_of_Vincent_van_Gogh

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

#28

Post by Aerroon »

beernet wrote: post #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 mediocr…

I disagree. You write when you have something to say. A service like Grammarly tries to help you convey what you want to say, but better. What you want to say is still up to you.

Words paint the picture, but the meaning of the picture is what matters.

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

#29

Post by simianwords »

shafyy wrote: post #11
weird-eye-issue wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Enough with this analgoy. It's flawed on so many levels. First and foremost, stop devaluing humanitiy and hyping up AI companies by parroting their party line. Second, LLMs don't learn. They can hold a very limited amount of context, as you know. And every time you need to start over. So fuck no, "teaching" and LLM is nothing like teaching an actual human.

absolutely they can learn. you are being emotional and the original point is correct.

i give the LLM my codebase and it indeed learns about it and can answer questions.

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

#30

Post by bonoboTP »

beernet wrote: post #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 mediocr…

It's great. Now that fancy writing is cheap and infinite, fields whose entire scholarship value was in obscurantist jargon bending have to actually start to turn on their brains and care about making more sense than an LLM can.
Post reply on HN