I find that AI is very useful for getting me past the 'blank page' writing block, but inevitably it writes in ways I would never, and so I end up editing it heavily. But, for me, a boy with ADHD, editing something is infinitely easier than writing it from scratch . I think this is the opposite of how most people tend to use LLMs, and I actually think my way is the "better" way. My issue has never been the act of writ…
I was also like this but I managed to wire my brain to get over the anxiety/fear whatever it was to getting started and it’s worked magically. And I’m thankful - I’d really hate to rely on something else to get me going…
That’s great! I just want to be clear - it’s not “reliance.” It is a tool, and I find it helpful.
I managed my entire life without it, and I can certainly continue to do that.
But there’s no reason, imho, to give up the automatic transmission just because I already know how to drive stick.
> I find that AI is very useful for getting me past the 'blank page' writing block, but inevitably it writes in ways I would never, and so I end up editing it heavily. But, for me, a boy with ADHD, editing something is infinitely easier than writing it from scratch. As someone who also has ADHD, I would beg you to reconsider this strategy. Getting the first thoughts down on paper is the hardest part, especially for t…
adhd'er here too. maybe the practice is good, but it takes a lot of energy, which is finite. i find that leaning on my strengths gets me far, far better results than trying to get up to par with everyone else on things im bad at. if a tool just lets you get started, and you can breeze through getting started on things that you might otherwise just never even start, it seems like using the tool is the way to go. ive b…
AI writing sucks. The punchy words, the hyperbole, the monotony and pervasiveness are all exhausting. But I can’t deny there’s one upside. People who grew up speaking and living in other languages, people whose english is poor, finally have a level playground. It’s a great equaliser of our english writing privilege. The thing that worries me most is that it's going to redefine the way we write. We absorb language. To…
In the world there have always been people who prefer to fit in and those who prefer to explore boundaries. All the people who love fitting in will continue to adopt whatever mainstream thing is happening and will continue to look and sound generic and boring.
Those who prefer exploring boundaries immediately go in the other direction and find clever and creative ways to stand out and have a unique voice. The more generic everyone else is, the more these people are driven to go the other way.
As a result, as before, the easy, generic things will be cheap and disposable and the thoughtful and creative will be valuable. If you want to be valuable you have to be thoughtful and creative, not cheap and generic.
But what if your rubber duck is actually steering your thought process (since you may not have a consolidated one)? In this way I think the AI as editor is far better than a rubber duck AI. While in the former, it might point out your mistakes and give useful advices (which is similar to what you describe), it might not steer your thought (unless your mistakes are far too severe!), and actually help in your reasoning…
I havily use llms for internal communication. I receive docen request per day from colleagues asking me very specific stuff by mail or teams about processes, setups, master data, my particular experiences with approaches, for contacts within our big corp or just general knowledge questions and how I would recommend to tackle certain problems: Setting up conditions in sap, where to find certain info or just send them…
> People have no problem with receiving obviously llm written answers. If I asked you for your particular experience on something and got an obvious LLM reply, I might say nothing or I might ask if it was an LLM, but either way I’m unlikely to ask you something or trust you ever again. Which also works for you, I guess, since it’d be one fewer person taking up your time. But if you had instead told me “I’m too swampe…
I really love my job and I much more love helping people with the work I do. I also much more prefer talking to people directly than writing emails answering, but it is still part of what I do, when you are an expert at something you want to share and multiply this expertise. You can write it down in a book, or at corporations you write documentation, but people prefer contacting someone, because they have always something the docs don’t tell. So people do so by asking questions. A lot by mail. So in was spending my time explaining stuff but in the context the person who needs it. This took a lot of time and I could not share it with enough colleagues ( a couple of hundred contact me regularly ) and the more you know the more people come to ask. They of course do call or meet with me as well, but then they look for discussion or developing new ideas. So today I can talk and enjoy discussing with them, while my knowledge can continue to be spread, helping the once that just seek to understand to do their job. Since I implemented this loop I get so much good feedback, because when it needs to be fast they send a mail, knowing it will be answered fast. If it is important to interact, they call. The best from all of it. Best time ever :)
I havily use llms for internal communication. I receive docen request per day from colleagues asking me very specific stuff by mail or teams about processes, setups, master data, my particular experiences with approaches, for contacts within our big corp or just general knowledge questions and how I would recommend to tackle certain problems: Setting up conditions in sap, where to find certain info or just send them…
This sounds like a very odd and very lonely job to me. Reading your description I pictured a comically tiny room with only one opening for incoming requests and another one for outgoing responses. Obviously silly, but in an abstract sense maybe not that far from the truth? It also sounds like you were overworked and when you started to use LLMs you've stripped yourself of the chance to work with a colleague.
I really love my job and I much more love helping people with the work I do. I also much more prefer talking to people directly than writing emails answering, but it is still part of what I do, when you are an expert at something you want to share and multiply this expertise. You can write it down in a book, or at corporations you write documentation, but people prefer contacting someone, because they have always something the docs don’t tell. So people do so by asking questions. A lot by mail. So in was spending my time explaining stuff but in the context the person who needs it. This took a lot of time and I could not share it with enough colleagues ( a couple of hundred contact me regularly ) and the more you know the more people come to ask. They of course do call or meet with me as well, but then they look for discussion or developing new ideas. So today I can talk and enjoy discussing with them, while my knowledge can continue to be spread, helping the once that just seek to understand to do their job. Since I implemented this loop I get so much good feedback, because when it needs to be fast they send a mail, knowing it will be answered fast. If it is important to interact, they call. The best from all of it. Best time ever :)
All the author’s reasons for wanting the raw text that wasn’t altered by AI are all the reasons why I like to pass my messages through llms because for most people clarity in thoughts is not a given.
Often, in formal communication, I find it makes a lot of sense to make it as robotic and to the point as possible because informing my boss about the progress of a project shouldn’t leak any emotions. This is not a romantic or social relationship where emotions need to be expressed.
And I like the idea of setting goals for what I want to convert and having these llms go through the message and let me strip out the fat and ensure there is little room for misinformation and digression.
So yeah, what the author wants probably works more in an informal social setting than in a formal.
> AI writing is almost indistinguishable from human writing This depends on what you consider AI writing. If I dictate what the AI must write word by word verbatim, is it considered AI writing? Is it something to do about the percentage of the text generated? Does it have to do with the vocabulary the AI knows? What if I don't know any other words than the AI does? Does it have to do with the efficiency of communicat…
> The only way text can become communication is when the writer has intents I'm curious as to what you mean by this. I assume you don't mean it literally, as that would be trivially falsifiable (for example, the text readout on a digital caliper doesn't have "intents", yet it absolutely communicates meaning), but I can't think of another way that you might have meant it. Could you elaborate?
The digital caliper isn't communicating with you. You're only reading text from a tool. I'm not expert in the field, but there are different "models of communication". For example one model has components: sender, receiver, message, channel, noise. The sender and the receiver are always people. There are other models focused on machines, but that's a very specific use of communication models.
> It robs me of getting to know you. Ugh, you are not entitled to get to know me. There is a threshold between all that I share with the world and the rest of me. Hell, not every person gets the same picture , and that's deliberate and healthy --my customers don't get to know what my proctologist knows. My mother doesn't get to know what my wife knows. You don't get to know all of me, because I don't trust you . This…
Weaponised therapy speak is gross. This article was not asking you to spill your life story to every person you meet, it was asking you to speak with your own voice, which is a perfectly normal and in no way entitled thing to be asking.
> It robs me of getting to know you. Ugh, you are not entitled to get to know me. There is a threshold between all that I share with the world and the rest of me. Hell, not every person gets the same picture , and that's deliberate and healthy --my customers don't get to know what my proctologist knows. My mother doesn't get to know what my wife knows. You don't get to know all of me, because I don't trust you . This…
What are you rambling about? It’s not about your doctor using ChatGPT for his newsletter, it’s about your colleagues using ChatGPT on Slack or email. I personally think that the people who can’t be bothered to actually write authentic messages, and assume that everyone will just read their word salad full of repetitive AI patterns, are being the ones acting entitled.
I'm not "rambling," asshole.
These are a few of those precious organic, human perspectives. You demand it, then disrespect me when I provide it?