alt Hacker NewsBut I don't really get what the problem is with using AI for editing. This article clearly has a sense of what it's trying to say. A human wrote the first draft, and then AI polished it. It's a method I use a lot myself. So it's a human plus AI hybrid piece, and honestly, I don't see anything particularly wrong with the content.
Stuff like isolating the hot core and packing the cold fields, that's just common knowledge you pick up.
Compared to purely human writing, it's actually safer and reads better than you'd expect, so I find it hard to understand why people are complaining about this.
If anything, I think tech blogs especially need to check whether their own thoughts line up with the knowledge of an LLM, which is basically a talking encyclopedia. But it seems like people don't really see it that way.
Replies
It's tedious to see the same rhetorical style everywhere. It's cliché overload. Basically 6 7 in prose form.
Unless you're writing for an extremely formal audience, I imagine most of us would prefer the unpolished version that actually sounds human.
> AI polished it [...] Compared to purely human writing [...] reads better than you'd expect
I'd hard disagree here. Not when you're bombarded with this every single day. First, you start to be able to reliable recognize this writing style. Then, every time you see it you start getting the urge to pick up your chair and smash your monitor with it.
There's also the issue of not being able to distinguish "AI slop" from "human written + AI polished". Am I being led to read some lazy, low quality AI slop? Or is this actually something that a real human spent time and effort to produce? Both look the same, so how can you tell the difference?
Personally I find it somewhat offensive to use AI in human-to-human communication. If you expect another person to read it then please write it yourself! It's not going to be as "polished" as-if AI would have written it, but that's okay! If you insist on using AI then, at most, just get it to review your writing and apply its findings wherever it makes sense.
Didnt read but i sent this to my llm and it checks out
We rely on subtle distinction in writing style to distinguish sources from each other and to read important cues into their communication intent, the same as with vocalized speech.
Scrubbing that away from writing with AI has the same effect as would running everyone's speech through an anonymizer.
Some people may be blind to that sort of thing entirely, much like some people can't recognize faces, but for most people it just creates a sense of noise and discomfort when everything everywhere is written in the same style. And that impression is only made worse when that increasingly uniquitous anonymized style is so painfully average and repetitive.
If there was a tool that let you edit select characteristics of your writing while preserving your voice, the way a professional editor might help a professional writer, that might be amazing for helping people communicate better and more easily. But that's not this. This is loud, articulate noise.