391–400 of 453 posts
The distinction that matters isn't AI or no AI — it's whether your thinking went through the response before it reached someone else. I'm building an app almost entirely with AI assistance as a non-technical founder. Half the time it leads me confidently down the wrong path and I spend my time course-correcting back to my original vision. I think that's the new way of working. I don't need to do the act of writing, b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... or practice sarcasm On the plus side, it gets easier with practice.
Sorry, my English was approximative, I meant that I would need to be sarcastic. But yeah, it does. Of course, sarcasm always works out great with people who don't already get that they are boring you to death with a long monologue...
AI conversations are like dreams: everyone has one they like and wants to share it with others ... but no on gives a crap about your dream/chat session, because it was uniquely appealing to you , and not them. Don't bore your co-workers (or others) with descriptions of your dreams, and don't throw a computer's dreams (AI chat logs) at them either.
Edit: amusing LLM bloopers may be an exception
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using LLM as a writing assistant to properly format your ideas, while lazy, is not the same thing as a slop bomb. They're highly rated because the original ideas are good, even if the writing quality is sloppish, and it genuinely contains human input that you can't get simply by asking LLMs a question.
If the AI has enough editing input that your article comes off stylistically as AI-written, it is lazy and your writing is not as good as you think it is.
Also my main problem with many chat bots. Too many different aspects brought up at once. Short answers would be more eco-friendly too.
I just reply with "Is this AI? I'd rather you replied yourself"
So if somebody wrote the same lengthy answer without AI you would not interfere? Shouldn't we criticize the issues of the text instead of it's creation process?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a great question! Ahem. I remember being advised to do this ~20 years ago when I was going to be answering questions from a group of people. I was told that it's good practice to say something like "that's a great question" every time someone asks anything, as a form of social lubrication, to encourage others to ask questions. I can't say whether it works, and it was advice for a spoken context rather than wri…
I've always seen and used "That's a great question!" and similar vacuous phrases when speaking as a polite way to buy some time while formulating an actual response to the questioner.
That's a great question! => I can tell you understood what I explained and used that understanding to reach the next step of reasoning just like I did.
I’ve become so cynical that I cannot read this phrasing without thinking it came from… an LLM.
This cynicism also negatively impacts human communication. This constant doubt of whether there was a thinker on the other side of the text.