2 ms·
The upside of all this is that professionals are communicating their points better. Lots of examples from non-English (-language) nationalities using LLM's to w
by perihelions 3y ago
The upside of all this is that professionals are communicating their points better. Lots of examples from non-English (-language) nationalities using LLM's to write exposition sections for English journals. This lowers the communications friction across the language barrier; and lowers the implicit bias and penalization when people read a (technically correct and useful) paper that has weak grammar, and is confusing to parse.
These aren't purely bad things! I wonder what future social conventions for this kind of thing will look like.
- vitiral 3y agoPerhaps two people can who don't fluently speak the same language can better communicate. But that's not really the bar is it? These are writing articles on behalf of fluent speakers for other fluent speakers to read. Is it improving THEIR "communication". I'd say by definition the answer is no, since it's no longer humans communicating with each other at all.
- esalman 3y agoThe first paper I opened from this list has whole related work section copy-pasted from chat GPT response. It implies that the authors did not care to thoroughly review related work. They basically didn't read any papers. If you try to have a technical conversation with this sort of a person, they'll communicate their points out of their behind.
- MarkSweep 3y agoI agree that LLM can be used as a tool by non-native English speakers. But the examples cited in the article are indefensible. The authors of the paper we either so care less they did not notice the the “certainly, here is…” preamble made no sense in a paper. Or they have such a poor grasp of English that they are unable to comprehend what they copy-pasted to notice. Either way this suggests that nothing in the paper can be relied upon.