I’m seriously not astroturfing, point is serious. Most people here would not be able to tell the difference between good human and good AI generated writing anymore in a blind test, especially a blend of both. So if the reader often can’t tell, why is the source of a well written, interesting piece of writing more important, than the effect of the content itself? I don’t feel the OP made a good argument imho.
> Most people here would not be able to tell the difference between good human and good AI generated writing anymore in a blind test, especially a blend of both. So if the reader often can’t tell
You say that, but I think it's really, really obvious in this case.
If you disagree, you should show us both versions.
I just skimmed the article, but I can already tell it's chock-full of LLMisms. In other words: ai;dr
Edit: ok, I've checked your profile and now I see that this is your website that you're astroturfing every thread you reply to. Stop doing that.
I’m seriously not astroturfing, point is serious. Most people here would not be able to tell the difference between good human and good AI generated writing anymore in a blind test, especially a blend of both. So if the reader often can’t tell, why is the source of a well written, interesting piece of writing more important, than the effect of the content itself? I don’t feel the OP made a good argument imho.
> Most people here would not be able to tell the difference between good human and good AI generated writing anymore in a blind test, especially a blend of both. So if the reader often can’t tell
You say that, but I think it's really, really obvious in this case.
If you disagree, you should show us both versions.
1 reply →