5 ms·

> You should also know that I learned to read early and skipped first grade. Consequently, I was the perennial runt of the classroom and spent all my time readi

> You should also know that I learned to read early and skipped first grade. Consequently, I was the perennial runt of the classroom and spent all my time reading as a child. I’ve gotten perfect scores on every reading test I’ve ever taken, including the SAT and GRE. This is actually useful to know. Many people grew up in a time or place where they didn't receive the same kind of education. They may have weak reading and writing skills. Many of these folks might feel self conscious about their writing. A writing assistant is one way they can feel more confident, and I don't think that's a bad thing, even if I can usually tell.

hiAndrewQuinn 1y ago
The Straussian read is fascinating: If LLMs get even marginally better at what they do, even people with perfect SAT and GRE reading scores who spend their entire adult lives working with these models won't be able to tell.
- justlikereddit 1y ago
  It doesn't matter if a penis enlargement advertisement is written by a Pulitzer price winner or an AI that can conquer the galaxy, it will still be slop.
phito 1y ago
I definitely don't like it either. These people make themselves look like their have more skills than they actually do.
- barbazoo 1y ago
  A bit like a crutch. I wouldn’t judge someone using those.
- bigyabai 1y ago
  FWIW, I was in the same boat (>95% reading/writing comprehension scores) but graduated with a circa-2.7 GPA. Everyone's always cherry-picking the nicest looking numbers for themselves.
  - phito 1y ago
    Well yes, but I don't think scores are presentative of skill at all. Maybe memorization skills.
jdietrich 1y ago
Not just writing, but reading and comprehension. LLMs are a life-changing technology for a very large proportion of the population. Tens of millions of Americans are functionally illiterate, but are forced to go through life in a world that at best wasn't designed for them and at worst is actively malicious towards them. A lot of people will look at a credit agreement they're about to sign and have no way of knowing whether it's a fair deal or naked exploitation that will financially ruin them. Thanks to LLMs, they can now point their phone camera at it and ask "is this a fair contract, or am I being ripped off". The LLM will give you an answer in speech and happily go back-and-forth with questions and clarifications for as long as you need. Whether the LLM is 90% accurate or 99% accurate at that task isn't truly critical, because it's a vast improvement over the status quo. Modern life is full of tasks that are utterly trivial for people in the top 10%, but a fraught ordeal for people lower down in the distribution. To paraphrase a very old adage: God created man and Sam Altman made them equal.
- nunez 1y ago
  Sorry, but this is a bad take. We should be addressing _why_ so much of our population is functionally illiterate and _why_ people can't read financial agreements that can harm them. This should definitely not be left to an extremely-profit-motivated entity to equalize. Instead, more states are eroding public education in favor of school choice and voucher programs, which is scary in a world wherein many parents would have no issues pulling their kids out of school or sending them to religious schools that consider the Bible as the authoritative text for everything, and for-profit schools would have no problem sacrificing curriculum, learning development and staff the minute it complicates revenue.
- 0xffany 1y ago
  I wholeheartedly disagree. Technology should not be fixing such a societal or legislative issue. In the example you're providing, why should the user trust the LLM, but not the credit agreement? Why shouldn't the LLM point the user to a different credit agreement, just as exploitative? The company operating the LLM may have such an incentive, and it could be very lucrative. Illiteracy in the case you are proposing can only increase, for the benefit of some. (The argument that people can use open source models can't possibly be applied, considering you're speaking about, as you called them, the other 90%, or even the functionally illiterate.) The last paragraph is concerning to say the least.
nunez 1y ago
I would rather see a piece with grammatical and spelling flaws that I _know_ came from that person's original thoughts than a LLM-perfected read with no clue about its inspirations. Also, you can't get better without practice. LLMs being so easily accessible will make it possible to never need to learn how to write, which is extremely dangerous given how Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon are the companies driving model development in the US and that LLMs aren't available all of the time (like, when you're outside interacting with real people).

hiAndrewQuinn 1y ago

The Straussian read is fascinating: If LLMs get even marginally better at what they do, even people with perfect SAT and GRE reading scores who spend their entire adult lives working with these models won't be able to tell.

justlikereddit 1y ago
It doesn't matter if a penis enlargement advertisement is written by a Pulitzer price winner or an AI that can conquer the galaxy, it will still be slop.

phito 1y ago

I definitely don't like it either. These people make themselves look like their have more skills than they actually do.

barbazoo 1y ago
A bit like a crutch. I wouldn’t judge someone using those.
bigyabai 1y ago
FWIW, I was in the same boat (>95% reading/writing comprehension scores) but graduated with a circa-2.7 GPA. Everyone's always cherry-picking the nicest looking numbers for themselves.
- phito 1y ago
  Well yes, but I don't think scores are presentative of skill at all. Maybe memorization skills.

jdietrich 1y ago

Not just writing, but reading and comprehension. LLMs are a life-changing technology for a very large proportion of the population. Tens of millions of Americans are functionally illiterate, but are forced to go through life in a world that at best wasn't designed for them and at worst is actively malicious towards them. A lot of people will look at a credit agreement they're about to sign and have no way of knowing whether it's a fair deal or naked exploitation that will financially ruin them. Thanks to LLMs, they can now point their phone camera at it and ask "is this a fair contract, or am I being ripped off". The LLM will give you an answer in speech and happily go back-and-forth with questions and clarifications for as long as you need. Whether the LLM is 90% accurate or 99% accurate at that task isn't truly critical, because it's a vast improvement over the status quo. Modern life is full of tasks that are utterly trivial for people in the top 10%, but a fraught ordeal for people lower down in the distribution. To paraphrase a very old adage: God created man and Sam Altman made them equal.

nunez 1y ago
Sorry, but this is a bad take. We should be addressing _why_ so much of our population is functionally illiterate and _why_ people can't read financial agreements that can harm them. This should definitely not be left to an extremely-profit-motivated entity to equalize. Instead, more states are eroding public education in favor of school choice and voucher programs, which is scary in a world wherein many parents would have no issues pulling their kids out of school or sending them to religious schools that consider the Bible as the authoritative text for everything, and for-profit schools would have no problem sacrificing curriculum, learning development and staff the minute it complicates revenue.
0xffany 1y ago
I wholeheartedly disagree. Technology should not be fixing such a societal or legislative issue. In the example you're providing, why should the user trust the LLM, but not the credit agreement? Why shouldn't the LLM point the user to a different credit agreement, just as exploitative? The company operating the LLM may have such an incentive, and it could be very lucrative. Illiteracy in the case you are proposing can only increase, for the benefit of some. (The argument that people can use open source models can't possibly be applied, considering you're speaking about, as you called them, the other 90%, or even the functionally illiterate.) The last paragraph is concerning to say the least.

nunez 1y ago

I would rather see a piece with grammatical and spelling flaws that I _know_ came from that person's original thoughts than a LLM-perfected read with no clue about its inspirations. Also, you can't get better without practice. LLMs being so easily accessible will make it possible to never need to learn how to write, which is extremely dangerous given how Microsoft, Meta, Google and Amazon are the companies driving model development in the US and that LLMs aren't available all of the time (like, when you're outside interacting with real people).