If your analysis of whether AI is good or bad is simply “I use it and I like it”, then you are a child, or an adult with the mental capabilities of a child.
I am using a tool that’s available to me. I’m not going to not use it just because some people use it wrong. What the fuck?
And if it wasn’t, I never would have discovered a new skill I had no clue I could do before, so I’m going to insist that you lick my nutsack. How’s that for maturity?
I totally agree with you. It’s a tool and it’s only as good as the person using it.
The truth is it is a competent editor and it can provide competent advice that you are not obliged to follow.
The ai slop, which is a very real thing, is human generated and posted by a human.
The data centers are being built because of high demand for LLM usage and the artificial ram shortage is driven by greed and poor business decisions. Blaming these things on llms is like blaming heroin for an addict using it.
Thank you. My point is it can be used to think with you, and not just for you. And, maybe provide a little virtual moral support, when you’re trying to do something new, and hard. I’m actually a little surprised Open AI hasn’t pushed this kind of use-case.
It’s not writing anything for me. It’s suggesting where I’m not making things clear, or where a quicker pace or punchier phrasing might help, awkward prose, inconsistent character voice, etc. And something to bounce ideas off of, like “does this make sense?”
And I can respond, and it adjusts, and helps me get to a baseline standard before a human looks at it–who I sent a draft to a few days ago. It’s 100% my own ideas, words, scene staging, and story. I still rewrote entire sections even though it said they were solid.
I don’t know a lot of writers, and getting friends and family to read 5 pages, let alone 2,000 words, or 13 chapters is near impossible. Critique meetups and such are only so helpful.
And I’ve never done this before, yet I’ve actually created something, which ChatGPT made a little easier by acting as a mostly competent editor with mostly mediocre creative instincts, anyway. Sometimes it’s nonsense, or forgets character traits, but it’s more helpful than zero support.
6 months ago I had no clue I was capable of anything like this, but now I’m doing it, and frankly it’s a pretty original story. Would you not consider that a positive use?
But by doing so, you’ve surrendered your voice. You say it makes things clearer, but sometimes ambiguity is good. You say it makes quicker and punchier phrasing, but some writing is best done low and slow. LLMs are by their nature the least common denominator, all the color of the creative world melted down and blended into a uniform grey. By relying on the LLM to alter your writing style, you’re making your writing more bland, generic, and indistinguishable from everyone else. You’re giving up what makes your writing you’re writing. You’re just another hand for the machine.
I do not consider it a positive use, as I would rather read imperfect human writing than grammatically perfect machine drivel. Imperfections are not a reason to enjoy human-created works. They’re the only thing that makes the works worth appreciating.
Not OP, but I’m glad you’re getting empowered. That’s imo the best use for it. It’s crazy to me how many people write this off, not understanding many aspiring creatives need these kinds of stepping stones to stay motivated. Because logically, if what you make takes off and becomes popular, at some point human employees are probably the better option than AI. And as you said, without AI you might have never taken the first leap. So it would end up creating more livelihood for creatives than taking away.
I appreciate that, thank you. Just wanted to suggest one way it can be not totally evil, and I am a admittedly a bit grateful for it as a handy assistant–like a Jarvis with minor brain damage.
Nope. I’ve been using it for preliminary writing editing. It’s not creating anything, just giving advice on how to make it clearer.
Do you happen to work at Ars Technica?
Ignoring the cost of something is incredibly immature.
Huh?
If your analysis of whether AI is good or bad is simply “I use it and I like it”, then you are a child, or an adult with the mental capabilities of a child.
I’m happy life is so simple for you though!
I am using a tool that’s available to me. I’m not going to not use it just because some people use it wrong. What the fuck?
And if it wasn’t, I never would have discovered a new skill I had no clue I could do before, so I’m going to insist that you lick my nutsack. How’s that for maturity?
I totally agree with you. It’s a tool and it’s only as good as the person using it.
The truth is it is a competent editor and it can provide competent advice that you are not obliged to follow.
The ai slop, which is a very real thing, is human generated and posted by a human.
The data centers are being built because of high demand for LLM usage and the artificial ram shortage is driven by greed and poor business decisions. Blaming these things on llms is like blaming heroin for an addict using it.
Thank you. My point is it can be used to think with you, and not just for you. And, maybe provide a little virtual moral support, when you’re trying to do something new, and hard. I’m actually a little surprised Open AI hasn’t pushed this kind of use-case.
Yes, everything you just said is why you are an idiot, and aren’t mature enough to be around adults yet.
And so, you have surrendered your voice to the machine. You are now something less than human.
It’s not writing anything for me. It’s suggesting where I’m not making things clear, or where a quicker pace or punchier phrasing might help, awkward prose, inconsistent character voice, etc. And something to bounce ideas off of, like “does this make sense?”
And I can respond, and it adjusts, and helps me get to a baseline standard before a human looks at it–who I sent a draft to a few days ago. It’s 100% my own ideas, words, scene staging, and story. I still rewrote entire sections even though it said they were solid.
I don’t know a lot of writers, and getting friends and family to read 5 pages, let alone 2,000 words, or 13 chapters is near impossible. Critique meetups and such are only so helpful.
And I’ve never done this before, yet I’ve actually created something, which ChatGPT made a little easier by acting as a mostly competent editor with mostly mediocre creative instincts, anyway. Sometimes it’s nonsense, or forgets character traits, but it’s more helpful than zero support.
6 months ago I had no clue I was capable of anything like this, but now I’m doing it, and frankly it’s a pretty original story. Would you not consider that a positive use?
But by doing so, you’ve surrendered your voice. You say it makes things clearer, but sometimes ambiguity is good. You say it makes quicker and punchier phrasing, but some writing is best done low and slow. LLMs are by their nature the least common denominator, all the color of the creative world melted down and blended into a uniform grey. By relying on the LLM to alter your writing style, you’re making your writing more bland, generic, and indistinguishable from everyone else. You’re giving up what makes your writing you’re writing. You’re just another hand for the machine.
I do not consider it a positive use, as I would rather read imperfect human writing than grammatically perfect machine drivel. Imperfections are not a reason to enjoy human-created works. They’re the only thing that makes the works worth appreciating.
I’m writing fiction. Sometimes parts benefit from slower or quick pacing. Sometimes you write something that makes no sense.
Not OP, but I’m glad you’re getting empowered. That’s imo the best use for it. It’s crazy to me how many people write this off, not understanding many aspiring creatives need these kinds of stepping stones to stay motivated. Because logically, if what you make takes off and becomes popular, at some point human employees are probably the better option than AI. And as you said, without AI you might have never taken the first leap. So it would end up creating more livelihood for creatives than taking away.
I appreciate that, thank you. Just wanted to suggest one way it can be not totally evil, and I am a admittedly a bit grateful for it as a handy assistant–like a Jarvis with minor brain damage.