> However, there's a reason pre-computing bureaucracy came with paper trails and meeting minutes getting written up, why court cases are increasingly cautious about the reliability of eye witnesses.

This was the comment I was coming in to make: I worked in a pre-computing bureaucracy (the U.S. Navy's) and "staff you delegated work to have consistent trouble following the directions you provide for the delegated work" is just a fact of life.

A lot of it is telephone game, a lot of it is is lack of real familiarity with office software, a lot of it is the inherent integration challenge from sending the same document out for coordination to dozens of stakeholders.

All those mistakes you made fixes for based on comments in the draft that went out for O-6 review? At least 2 will pop up again at 1-star review because staffers will copy the same text back out from their local copy they had stashed during O-6 review rather than re-reviewing from scratch.

Style guidance to meet the Admiral's preferred format? You can provide it but there's not a chance they'll follow it, formatting is for humanities majors so you'll need to catch and fix all that yourself.

That's not to say the LLMs are foolproof or magically always correct, but a lot of these style of criticisms apply just as much, if not more, to the current status quo. I don't need LLMs to be perfect, I just need them to be better than the current alternatives.