Yes, they’re annoying, and yes, they’re flooding social media. But. Yes, there’s a big “but.” We shouldn’t condemn everything generated by AI across the board. I’ve been in the IT industry for over 20 years myself. I studied philosophy and computer science in Germany. I’ve been interested in AI since my youth. It started with Prolog, then a lot of science fiction, game development, and 10 years ago, a lot of work with machine learning and data science. I saw ChatGPT coming. Since we were working a lot with natural language processing back then (classic NLP, Word2Vec, seq2seq) and especially since GPT-2, it was actually clear to me that the era of large language models was on the horizon. Now I’m digressing a bit. I recently received a message from a colleague asking me to briefly read his blog post on quantum computing and share my opinion. He assured me that he wrote it himself and didn’t use any AI. I read it. I’m no expert on quantum computing, but I’m very interested in it and have already read and researched a lot about it. Be that as it may, I’m no expert. I read through the article and thought it was okay. Since I’ve known my colleague for several years and had already read quite a bit of his work, I could easily tell that he really had written it himself. I replied to him, said it was okay, and offered some suggestions for improvement. At the same time, I sent him a version that had been revised by the AI (in this case, Opus 4.8). I asked him to read that version as well. The AI-generated version had retained the core of his original text while significantly enhancing it. You could still recognize his style, and the message remained the same as in his original. It wasn’t until two days later that I got a reply from him (God knows what was going through his mind). He admitted that the AI version was much better than his own and that he had incorporated a lot of it into his original text. I can’t say exactly what his thoughts were yet. I’ll ask him more about it over a beer next time. I’ve kept you waiting long enough. What am I actually getting at with this post? I believe it’s fundamentally wrong to condemn AI-generated text across the board. Especially since the results keep getting better, it really depends on how you use AI. That’s the crucial point for me. AI is an amplifier and a sparring partner. It’s there to make us better and more efficient, not to replace us. Once you understand that, your perspective on AI changes significantly. That’s why you shouldn’t condemn AI-generated text across the board. I’ve even had results that amazed me, and it was clear to me that I could never have achieved that level of quality, precision, and clarity on my own (I’m probably just a bad writer). I completely agree with you on one point. Poorly generated AI text (AI slop) without prior review is extremely annoying and frustrating. But it’s not the AI’s fault, it’s the fault of the people who allow it. I hope I haven’t bored you with my post, and thank you in advance for your comments. This text is 100% not written by AI 😉 submitted by /u/Philo167
Originally posted by u/Philo167 on r/ArtificialInteligence