4 ms·

I think it's generally insulting to your audience to write with an LLM. If you don't care about what you're saying, why should someone care to read it? I hope t

by andy99 2y ago

I think it's generally insulting to your audience to write with an LLM. If you don't care about what you're saying, why should someone care to read it? I hope the advent of automated writing will lead to reforms in the way research is presented, with less focus on boilerplate or other stuff nobody cares about (societal impact statements some conferences force on us). For grant applications, I agree it's a great tool because they're rife with bureaucratic crap that nobody really needs to read or write. In time, again hopefully the system will be reformed to not waste time asking for stuff an LLM could generate.

bjourne 2y ago
> I think it's generally insulting to your audience to write with an LLM. But not as insulting as commenting on HN before even skimming the article you're commenting on. :)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
BeetleB 2y ago
> I think it's generally insulting to your audience to write with an LLM. If you don't care about what you're saying, why should someone care to read it? I do care about what I'm saying. That's why I review the LLMs output and edit before sending. If an LLM can express what I meant to say better than I can, why would I not use it? Personally, I don't do this because the LLM changes the style of my text too much and doesn't sound like me any more. But oh, I so do wish it could. Often I type a first draft of an email, and I know it needs (simple) editing. If an LLM could do it for me, I'd be very happy. For research papers, writing the introduction is a large headache, and frankly, is often more of a ritual. It's the least important part of the paper. I mean, if all I had to do is describe the purpose of my paper, etc, that would be great. But a lot of referees want me to load it up with a lot more verbiage to satisfy dubious traditions. Unfortunately, GPT can't do it for me. But it should.

by andy99 2y ago

bjourne 2y ago

> I think it's generally insulting to your audience to write with an LLM. But not as insulting as commenting on HN before even skimming the article you're commenting on. :)

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

BeetleB 2y ago

> I think it's generally insulting to your audience to write with an LLM. If you don't care about what you're saying, why should someone care to read it? I do care about what I'm saying. That's why I review the LLMs output and edit before sending. If an LLM can express what I meant to say better than I can, why would I not use it? Personally, I don't do this because the LLM changes the style of my text too much and doesn't sound like me any more. But oh, I so do wish it could. Often I type a first draft of an email, and I know it needs (simple) editing. If an LLM could do it for me, I'd be very happy. For research papers, writing the introduction is a large headache, and frankly, is often more of a ritual. It's the least important part of the paper. I mean, if all I had to do is describe the purpose of my paper, etc, that would be great. But a lot of referees want me to load it up with a lot more verbiage to satisfy dubious traditions. Unfortunately, GPT can't do it for me. But it should.