←back to thread

Thesis: Interesting work is less amenable to the use of AI

(remark.ing)
175 points koch | 1 comments | 06 Jul 25 21:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.307s | source
Show context
janaagaard ◴[07 Jul 25 06:00 UTC] No.44487201[source]▶
A Danish audio newspaper host / podcaster had the exact apposite conclusion when he used ChatGPT to write the manuscript for one his episodes. He ended up spending as much time as he usually does because he had to fact check everything that the LLM came up with. Spoiler: It made up a lot of stuff despite it being very clear in the prompt, that it should not do so. To him, it was the most fun part, that is writing the manuscript, that the chatbot could help him with. His conclusion about artificial intelligence was this:

“We thought we were getting an accountant, but we got a poet.”

Frederik Kulager: Jeg fik ChatGPT til at skrive dette afsnit, og testede, om min chefredaktør ville opdage det. https://open.spotify.com/episode/22HBze1k55lFnnsLtRlEu1?si=h...

replies(3): >>44487466 #>>44487532 #>>44488237 #
satisfice ◴[07 Jul 25 09:05 UTC] No.44488237[source]▶
As a writer I find his take appalling and incomprehensible. So, apparently not all writers agree that writing with AI is fun. To me, it’s a sickening violation of integrity.
replies(2): >>44489114 #>>44489743 #
1. pickledoyster ◴[07 Jul 25 12:37 UTC] No.44489743[source]▶
Yeah, if I were their reader, I'd most likely never read anything from them again, since nothing's stopping them from doing away with integrity altogether and just stitching together a bunch of scripts ('agents') into an LLM slop pipeline.

It's so weird how people use LLMs to automate the most important and rewarding parts of the creative process. I get that companies have no clue how to market the things, but it really shows a lack of imagination and self-awareness when a 'creative' repackages slop for their audience and calls it 'fun'.