4 ms·
One factor to consider is AI-Augmented content. I'm not an academic reviewer, but I certainly will do some sort of analysis, write up some key bullet points, th
by jacobr1 3y ago
One factor to consider is AI-Augmented content. I'm not an academic reviewer, but I certainly will do some sort of analysis, write up some key bullet points, then ask chatgpt to synthesis some prose for a report. I then make a few tweaks and edits and send it off. The core content is coming from my analysis, not generation, but if I'm being lazy the content ends up having the "default chatgpt style." I could imagine this ends up being common, especially for non-english natives.
- adultSwim 3y agoI support this style of usage. The impression given from this example is that the content itself, not the style, is low quality.
- hedora 3y agoI've noticed this style of usage greatly reduces the quality of work my colleagues produce. The computer is great at writing stuff that looks right, but is not. Also, at least some of the "increased productivity" boils down to "I spent less time thinking about the underlying problem while I was composing text and copy-editing".
- gnicholas 3y agoBut what about the times where your colleagues use LLMs in this way, but the output is good enough that you don't realize it?