The weird part about tools like this isn't just the copyright question, it's the simulation of authority
Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
91–100 of 214 posts
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That isn't learning, it can read things in its context, and generate materials to assist answering further prompts but that doesn't change the model weights. It is just updating the context. Unless you are actually fine tuning models, in which case sure, learning is taking place.
[deleted]
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#93I know all press is good press... but there are limits. If it feels like Grammarly does not respect your right to digital sovereignty, it is because it does not.
The real issue seems more about transparency and consent around how the models are trained and how author personas are being used
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#94The 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.
LLMs obviously aren't reproducing the internal cognitive process, but they might still capture some of the structural patterns that emerge from it
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not thinking, just regurgitating catch phrases that are factually incorrect hallucinations. So how are you any better than an LLM?
[flagged]
Humanity as a whole is far from being consumption neutral with regards to non-renewable resources, so in a way, you really can't.
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#96I spent a great deal of time trying to do this at allofus.ai with a team of ex-googlers with our goal being to help creators eventually 'own' their personas and drive and compete to use them to help end users.
We believed this was coming and that the best way to handle it was give the real person control over their persona to grow/edit/change and train it as they see fit.
I actually own the patent on building an expert persona based on the context of the prompt plus the real persons learned information manifold...
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#97Earlier 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?
Which part is "factually incorrect"?
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
like OP originally said, the LLM doesn't have access to the actual process of the author, only the completed/refined output. Not sure why you need a concrete example to "test", but just think about the fact that the LLM has no idea how a writer brainstorms, re-iterates on their work, or even comes up with the ideas in the first place.
> has no idea how a writer brainstorms This isn't true in general, and not even true in many specific cases, because a great deal of writers have described the process of writing in detail and all of that is in their training data. Claude and chatgpt very much know how novels are written, and you can go into claude code and tell it you want to write a novel and it'll walk you through quite a lot of it -- worldbuildin…
Professional writer here. On our longer work, we go through multiple iterations, with lots of teardowns and recalibrations based on feedback from early, private readers, professional editors, pop culture -- and who knows. You won't find very clear explanations of how this happens, even in writers' attempts to explain their craft. We don't systematize it, and unless we keep detailed in-process logs (doubtful), we can't even reconstruct it.
It's certainly possible to mimic many aspects of a notable writer's published style. ("Bad Hemingway" contests have been a jokey delight for decades.) But on the sliding scale of ingenious-to-obnoxious uses for AI, this Grammarly/Superhuman idea feels uniquely misguided.
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#99I know all press is good press... but there are limits. If it feels like Grammarly does not respect your right to digital sovereignty, it is because it does not.
It almost seems like this whole feature is designed to invite law suits. Seems pretty likely usage of Grammarly's core product has cratered in the past few years. Not totally hard to imagine one of the big AI labs paying their legal fees in exchange for putting this out there and kick starting the legal process on some of these issues.
LLMs basically made Grammarly irrelevant as a product. Why have a tool to correct your grammar when you can just have it write the whole piece for you. And one things LLMs do well is construct grammatically correct text.
So IMO they are just flinging things at the wall trying to find a way back.
Re: Grammarly is offering ‘expert’ AI reviews from famous dead and living writers
#100"We can do it because no one can stop us."