But the LLMs really seem to fixate on using the same ones in the same places all the time. I guess that's because that's the highest probability construction.
Only mentioning because your "actually" may imply you thought you were disagreeing, when in fact it's one big happy family!
If/when AGI arrives I assume this tactic will stop working.
"it's a load bearing poster..."
anyway, the other way is I found it's helpful when prompting LLMs to use the same "it's not delivery, it's DiGiorno's" pattern that they're all so obsessed with. especially when the thing's misapprehended some concept, so you need to clarify. this hasn't yet generalized from the fake "conversations" I have with chatbots into my conversational style out in the real world, but the risk is fully there. (it's not an inevitability -- it's an occupational hazard.)
But if I'm reading what is supposed to be someone's original thoughts, it's a huge bummer to see an obvious AI tell. You might say that "it's not just disappointing—it's disrespectful."
I still keep the AI label even if I edit the result for correctness or clarity etc. The last thing I want to do is have someone read AI content and think it came directly from me. I really don't understand the thinking of people that do that - it's like they're hiding or intentionally cheating somehow.
AI generated content can be really, really useful (with some guidance, AI is way better at creating useful git commit messages and jira ticket comments than I am), but pretending that content is yours just seems way too much like straight up lying.
I use the humanize skill to clean up AI written work before handing it over to colleagues.
I get just as mad about shitty human output as I do about shitty LLM output. The bad thing about LLMs is that they have increased the volume of shit most people have to sift through.
When you open a requirements doc and it’s got 13 load bearing em dashes on the first page you known it’s gonna be bad day
To me, it's disrespectful to expect someone to waste their day reading every word of a blog post when even the author has not read every word. It shows that you value your time over your reader's time.
There was an HN submission recently where the author spent a lot of time and effort working with an LLM to write a story and get the LLM to follow a specific style and whatnot. Wish I could recall it offhand. Many commenters were very upset when they found out it was LLM generated, even though they couldn’t tell while reading it.
Basically what matters to me is some combo of how much effort went into it, and how accurate it is.
Because it just feels lazy. It triggers my "If you couldn't be bothered to write it, why do you expect me to spend my time reading it" allergy.
I guess you could write an editor that does it? Tracks the origin of every word in the document? But what if you cut'n'paste a word? Or worse, see it and retype it manually?
I think the best you can hope for here is "this text was written with AI assistance".