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

51–60 of 214 posts

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

#51

Post by simianwords »

tovej wrote: post #44
simianwords wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i don't buy this logic. if i have studied an author greatly i will be able to recognise patterns and be able to write like them. ex: i read a lot of shakespeare, understand patterns, understand where he came from, his biography and i will be able to write like him. why is it different for an LLM? i again don't get what the point is?

You can understand his biography and analyses about how shakespeare might have written. You can apply this knowledge to modify your writing process. The LLM does not model text at this meta-level. It can only use those texts as examples, it cannot apply what is written there to it's generation process.

no it does and what you said is easily falsifiable.

can you provide a _single_ example where LLM might fail? lets test this now.

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

#52

Post by latexr »

simianwords wrote: post #23
whizzter wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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)

An LLM can always output steps, but it doesn’t mean they are true, they are great at making up bullshit.

When the “how many ‘r’ in ‘strawberry’” question was all the rage, you could definitely get LLMs to explain the steps of counting, too. It was still wrong.

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

#53

Post by ibejoeb »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #38
ibejoeb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a tiny fraction. Most people write because they're told to write.

Are you talking about children or students? I think most people write because they want to communicate.

Children and young students, certainly. Adult students: almost 100%. If writing is your job, then by definition, and your problem is more often finding something to say, not writing it.

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

#54

Post by simianwords »

latexr wrote: post #52
simianwords wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

An LLM can always output steps, but it doesn’t mean they are true , they are great at making up bullshit. When the “how many ‘r’ in ‘strawberry’” question was all the rage, you could definitely get LLMs to explain the steps of counting, too. It was still wrong.

can you provide a single example now with gpt 5.4 thinking that makes up things in steps? lets try to reproduce it.

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

#55

Post by latexr »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #38
ibejoeb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a tiny fraction. Most people write because they're told to write.

Are you talking about children or students? I think most people write because they want to communicate.

You’re not counting all the office workers who have to write reports or emails, or all the scammers who write those websites to manipulate SEO or show you ads.

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

#56

Post by jagged-chisel »

bonoboTP wrote: post #30
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.

> … have to actually start to …

Or do they?

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

#57

Post by mysterydip »

simianwords wrote: post #21
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.

Is the reason it can show steps for solving an integral because the training set contained webpages or books showing how to do it?

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

#58

Post by simianwords »

mysterydip wrote: post #57
simianwords wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Is the reason it can show steps for solving an integral because the training set contained webpages or books showing how to do it?

if we have steps for understanding any author's english and creative process (generally not specific to an author) would you agree then it is possible for an llm to do it?

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

#59

Post by bonoboTP »

jagged-chisel wrote: post #56
bonoboTP wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> … have to actually start to … Or do they?

Maybe not. But academia is going to change. Status will still have to be allocated by some mechanism but the classic journals and reviews based system will crumble under the weight of LLMs. Of course this will upset a great many of people who enjoy the current state of things.

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

#60

Post by delaminator »

DonHopkins wrote: post #22
ErroneousBosh wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

[flagged]
Post reply on HN