3 ms·

> and a little AI help can't hurt here. Wrong wrong wrong. Bad writing makes the reader stop thinking about what you wanted to convey. As unintuitive as it is

by aprilthird2021 11d ago

> and a little AI help can't hurt here. Wrong wrong wrong. Bad writing makes the reader stop thinking about what you wanted to convey. As unintuitive as it is for most people in this forum, AI writing smell is as bad as bad grammar. Doesn't matter how you get rid of it. Maybe even more AI can clean those up, but those unintuitive phrases that pop up in AI writing are going to be a hindrance for many people who would love for the focus to be on what they're presenting, not the sloppy way they've written it up

pitkali 11d ago
> AI writing smell is as bad as bad grammar It sounds to me like you want to censor perfectly fine phrasing just because AI rolled the dice to use it. Let's not forget that AI learned to "speak" from people in the first place. Not to mention that as people shift their phrasing to avoid being accused of using AI, the AI will keep evolving, training on the new phrasing and then adopting it, too. I understand the language evolves, but evolving language just to sound different from AI feels like wasting effort better spent elsewhere. On actual substance of the message for example.
- aprilthird2021 10d ago
  You can believe what you want. I don't censor bad grammar, but it's not good writing, and it will have negative effects on someone's writing and who will read it. You can have your fingers in your ears or you can adapt.
  - pitkali 9d ago
    > I don't censor bad grammar. We're not talking about bad grammar, but sentences that are correct and sensible, and if you wrote them before AI, nobody would bat an eye. But because they are used by AI, these days they make people dismiss the whole piece. It's not really different from dismissing people because they happened to use the same phrasing as Stephen King. You can't even tell if it's because they read Stephen King that much, Stephen King wrote it for them, and they are now trying to pass it as their own, or just coincidentally arrived at the same literary construction. Whenever I see those threads, they usually don't discuss the merits of the writing. They claim that AI must have been used, so it's not even worth reading.

pitkali 11d ago

> AI writing smell is as bad as bad grammar It sounds to me like you want to censor perfectly fine phrasing just because AI rolled the dice to use it. Let's not forget that AI learned to "speak" from people in the first place. Not to mention that as people shift their phrasing to avoid being accused of using AI, the AI will keep evolving, training on the new phrasing and then adopting it, too. I understand the language evolves, but evolving language just to sound different from AI feels like wasting effort better spent elsewhere. On actual substance of the message for example.

aprilthird2021 10d ago
You can believe what you want. I don't censor bad grammar, but it's not good writing, and it will have negative effects on someone's writing and who will read it. You can have your fingers in your ears or you can adapt.
- pitkali 9d ago
  > I don't censor bad grammar. We're not talking about bad grammar, but sentences that are correct and sensible, and if you wrote them before AI, nobody would bat an eye. But because they are used by AI, these days they make people dismiss the whole piece. It's not really different from dismissing people because they happened to use the same phrasing as Stephen King. You can't even tell if it's because they read Stephen King that much, Stephen King wrote it for them, and they are now trying to pass it as their own, or just coincidentally arrived at the same literary construction. Whenever I see those threads, they usually don't discuss the merits of the writing. They claim that AI must have been used, so it's not even worth reading.