5 ms·

If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading.

by jsheard 2y ago

pixl97 2y ago
I mean, there is a lot of hand written crap to, so even that isn't a good rule.
- mcny 2y ago
  It is a necessary but not sufficient condition, perhaps?
- colecut 2y ago
  That rule does not imply the inverse
  - pixl97 2y ago
    I mean we have automated systems that 'write' things like tornado warnings. Would you rather we have someone hand write that out? It seems the initial rule seems rather worthless.
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
    - colecut 1y ago
      1. I think the warnings are generally "written" by humans. Maybe some variables filled in during the automation. 2. So a rule with occasional exceptions is worthless, ok
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- layer8 2y ago
  That sounds like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent.
- leptons 1y ago
  >I mean, there is a lot of hand written crap to You know how I know the difference between something an AI wrote and something a human wrote? The AI knows the difference between "to" and "too". I guess you proved your point.
- meindnoch 1y ago
  Both statements can be true at the same time, even though they seem to point in different directions. Here's how: 1. *"If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading"* is a normative or idealistic statement — it sets a standard or value judgment about the quality of writing and reading. It suggests that only writing with value, purpose, or quality should be produced or consumed. 2. *"There is a lot of handwritten crap"* is a descriptive statement — it observes the reality that much of what is written (specifically by hand, in this case) is low in quality, poorly thought-out, or not meaningful. So, putting them together: * The first expresses *how things ought to be*. * The second expresses *how things actually are*. In other words, the existence of a lot of poor-quality handwritten material does not invalidate the ideal that writing should be worth doing if it's to be read. It just highlights a gap between ideal and reality — a common tension in creative or intellectual work. Would you like to explore how this tension plays out in publishing or education?
  - idkfasayer 1y ago
    [dead]
- palata 1y ago
  > If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading. It does NOT mean, AT ALL, that if it is worth writing, it is worth reading. Logic 101?
- namaria 1y ago
  Necessary != sufficient.
floren 1y ago
Reminds me of something I wrote back in 2023: "If you wrote it with an LLM, it wasn't worth writing" https://jfloren.net/b/2023/11/1/0 https://jfloren.net/b/2023/11/1/0
ToValueFunfetti 1y ago
There's a lot of documentation out there that I've found was left unwritten but that I would have loved to read

If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading.

pixl97 2y ago

I mean, there is a lot of hand written crap to, so even that isn't a good rule.

mcny 2y ago
It is a necessary but not sufficient condition, perhaps?
colecut 2y ago
That rule does not imply the inverse
- pixl97 2y ago
  I mean we have automated systems that 'write' things like tornado warnings. Would you rather we have someone hand write that out? It seems the initial rule seems rather worthless.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - colecut 1y ago
    1. I think the warnings are generally "written" by humans. Maybe some variables filled in during the automation. 2. So a rule with occasional exceptions is worthless, ok
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
layer8 2y ago
That sounds like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denying_the_antecedent.
leptons 1y ago
>I mean, there is a lot of hand written crap to You know how I know the difference between something an AI wrote and something a human wrote? The AI knows the difference between "to" and "too". I guess you proved your point.
meindnoch 1y ago
Both statements can be true at the same time, even though they seem to point in different directions. Here's how: 1. *"If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading"* is a normative or idealistic statement — it sets a standard or value judgment about the quality of writing and reading. It suggests that only writing with value, purpose, or quality should be produced or consumed. 2. *"There is a lot of handwritten crap"* is a descriptive statement — it observes the reality that much of what is written (specifically by hand, in this case) is low in quality, poorly thought-out, or not meaningful. So, putting them together: * The first expresses *how things ought to be*. * The second expresses *how things actually are*. In other words, the existence of a lot of poor-quality handwritten material does not invalidate the ideal that writing should be worth doing if it's to be read. It just highlights a gap between ideal and reality — a common tension in creative or intellectual work. Would you like to explore how this tension plays out in publishing or education?
- idkfasayer 1y ago
  [dead]
palata 1y ago
> If it's not worth writing, it's not worth reading. It does NOT mean, AT ALL, that if it is worth writing, it is worth reading. Logic 101?
namaria 1y ago
Necessary != sufficient.

floren 1y ago

Reminds me of something I wrote back in 2023: "If you wrote it with an LLM, it wasn't worth writing" https://jfloren.net/b/2023/11/1/0 https://jfloren.net/b/2023/11/1/0

ToValueFunfetti 1y ago

There's a lot of documentation out there that I've found was left unwritten but that I would have loved to read