4 ms·
I could see a use for having the AI describe the generalities (some of which could be provided in the prompt) and then have a human go in and fill in specifics
by Karunamon 4y ago
I could see a use for having the AI describe the generalities (some of which could be provided in the prompt) and then have a human go in and fill in specifics or correct inaccuracies. Either way it amounts to a laborsaving tool, it's much easier to read than it is to write.
- falcor84 4y agoYeah, agreed, I would say it's much easier to "rewrite" than to write. Even if the AI is writing nonsense, you still benefit by virtue of Cunningham's Law.
- danpalmer 4y ago> it's much easier to read than it is to write I see your point, although I'm not certain I agree. It's very easy to read what we hope to see, especially when we know the topic, rather than what the text actually says. This is why proof reading is so hard for the author to do. Copilot has a similar issue, pushing more effort from code-authoring to code-review, which I'd suggest humans are probably worse at.