←back to thread

It's rude to show AI output to people

(distantprovince.by)
321 points distantprovince | 3 comments | 19 Jul 25 16:57 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lvl155 ◴[19 Jul 25 17:42 UTC] No.44617588[source]▶
While I understand this sentiment, some people simply suck at writing nice emails or have a major communication issue. It’s also not bad to run your important emails through multiple edits via AI.
replies(7): >>44617614 #>>44617714 #>>44617746 #>>44617774 #>>44617827 #>>44618111 #>>44621147 #
z3c0 ◴[19 Jul 25 17:45 UTC] No.44617614[source]▶
Is it too much to ask them to learn? People can have poor communication habits and still write* a thoughtful email.
replies(2): >>44617839 #>>44618199 #
1. Al-Khwarizmi ◴[19 Jul 25 18:44 UTC] No.44618199[source]▶
Maybe yes, it's too much?

I'm a non-native English speaker who writes many work emails in English. My English is quite good, but still, it takes me longer to write email in English because it's not as natural. Sometimes I spend a few minutes wondering if I'm getting the tone right or maybe being too pushy, if I should add some formality or it would sound forced, etc., while in my native language these things are automatic. Why shouldn't I use an LLM to save those extra minutes (as long as I check the output before sending it)?

And being non-native with a good English level is nothing compared to people who might have autism, etc.

replies(2): >>44618483 #>>44620615 #
2. z3c0 ◴[19 Jul 25 19:21 UTC] No.44618483[source]▶
I'm a native English speaker who asks myself the same questions on most emails. You can use LLM outputs all you want, but if you're worried about the tone, LLM edits drive the tone to a level of generic that ranges from milquetoast, to patronizing, to outright condescending. I expect some will even begin to favor pushy emails, because at least it feels human.
3. sfink ◴[19 Jul 25 23:56 UTC] No.44620615[source]▶
If you're checking the outputs, and I mean really checking (and adjusting) them, then I'd say this use is fine.