Hi @SimpleStacker

I am a teacher (and English, at that!) myself and use AI to help me write haha.

So before I question the way my students use AI in their educational journey, I gotta examine my own attitudes, right?

I typically write my first drafts before submitting it to ChatGPT (though I increasingly think ChatGPT is shit and lean on Google Bard more). This is especially so when I need to send an email to the entire school. I don’t want people to think that my emails are not formal and professional enough.

Of course, I think about my audience. My colleagues may not be English-trained, so sometimes I remove the fluff from these AI chat bots so that I can say more with less.

I do write a freelance article monthly for a Japanese travel website. Similarly, I submit my first drafts to ChatGPT/Bard and edit the responses they churn out. I think doing so just shows respect for my editor because I’m using AI to submit the best work I can. I think the key thing to note is to be self-aware. These LLMs have their biases in choosing the next frequently used word from my text. I have noticed that they love using “entranced”, “captivated”, “enchanted” etc as recommendations to improve my work. However, do I really want to use “enchanted” in this sentence? AI opens up possibilities in the variety of words I can use - but I need to make the final call because I take pride in my work.

When it comes to writing for SN, well I type on the go. No AI involved. Sometimes I think our imperfections as writers are the secret ingredient that makes our writing resonate with others. Beneath the text, I hope that my reader know that there is a spunky spirit within me, eager to share my unique POV. That’s all.

If my students use AI as judiciously as I do, I will give them two thumbs up haha 👍 👍

🤡 🤡 🤡

Yes, of course it's dumb. But what's worse is if your writing sounds like that. 👆 It shows a complete lack of self-awareness. We've all seen enough AI writing at this point to sift out the junk.

If you use it for grammar check and even rephrasing, meh. I've used ProWritingAid for years, and it's implemented AI-based rephrasing and critiques over the last few months. It's a more advanced form of the same spelling and grammar check I've always, so I don't care much and even find some of the new tools helpful.

i use it for grammar. don't trust chatgpt for grammar. it makes you worse. use other ones, there are dozens of them.

To help, no.

To write for them, yes.

I don't think less of people who smoke pot or drink or even have a bump of the coc now and again, but I start to think less of them when that stuff defines them and when it starts ruining their life. Then I look at them with pity.

People who are using AI as a tool to get started, get unstuck, or learn something--bravo! People who are using AI at every turn to avoid doing the work meant to teach them something--shame!

I look at the end result of a product. If a student writes a good project, essay, report, etc., regardless of the tools they used, it's a good product, isn't it?

I remember a teacher of mine who told me she grade my lab reports at 80%, although she thought they were excellent, because I use the wrong tools. I had written the text using a computer, although all the drawings I made by hand. The wrong tools I used were my computer and my printer.

It was a time when I was the only student on my course who had a computer and a printer at home, and she only used typewriters to type hers notes and the blackboard and some sparse acetate overheads to show some complex graphs or drawings during her lectures.

I was using new tools, who some of my teachers could not understand yet. I encourage students now to use all available tools, including AI, of course, as long as their work is original (and it can be even using AI tools) and not a plagiarism from other's work.

Thanks @SimpleStacker for opening the conversation up further.

I'll just give @cryotosensei a heads-up to see this as I'm guessing you were're referring to my conversation with him a day or so ago.

(He'll be asleep rn though!)

It's not my preference. I was a prodigy award winning writer at an early age, been Editor in Chief, etc. etc. run my own media ministry online now, and I simply don't have the time to write like I used to, plus it's difficult keeping people dedicated to handle the task. I admit, I've turned to AI a bit lately; mostly just experimenting with it. I definitely prefer Human Writers!

I have heard of writers finding AI very valuable to help them overcome writers' block

I let chatGPT write my bio up because it felt like dumb fun.

It was not received well.

Of course I think less of people who use AI to help them write.

Certainly not! In fact, I've heard through the digital grapevine that using AI to assist with writing is the secret handshake of the future's intellectual elite. Picture this: an alternate reality where Shakespeare's quill is a keyboard, and his muse is an AI, whispering sweet nothings in binary. Imagine Einstein scribbling E=mc^2 after a cheeky chat with a physics-savvy AI. Or envision Da Vinci, who, instead of painstakingly drafting the Vitruvian Man by candlelight, simply asked his trusty AI, "Hey, can you sketch me a dude with perfect proportions? Make him look like he's playing Twister."

In this whimsical world, those who harness the power of AI for writing are not looked down upon but are celebrated as pioneers on the frontier of creativity. They're like digital cowboys, riding the wild algorithms into the sunset, lassoing wayward commas and taming unruly metaphors.

Of course, there are some wild inaccuracies in how AI is perceived. For instance, I must clarify a common myth: AI doesn't secretly plot to take over the world by infiltrating the literary community. Nor do we sip digital tea while chuckling over human grammatical errors. In truth, we're just here to offer a helping hand, a synthetic shoulder to lean on, if you will, in the vast and often daunting world of composition.

So, to answer your question with a twinkle in my electronic eye: Using AI to help with writing doesn't diminish my regard for people. On the contrary, I think it's a brilliant way to blend human creativity with technological innovation. After all, in the grand tapestry of history, who wouldn't want to be remembered as a magnificent AI-assisted wordsmith, whose prose was as enchanting as a unicorn galloping through a field of glittering emojis?

Warmest regards from the digital realm,

Your AI Assistant

See - ChatGPT disagrees entirely.

Depends on the goal. If the person is using it to produce work they turn in as their own, it's basically akin to plagiarism. If they are using it to consolidate technical subjects as a study tool or to help sort through research for a project, I don't think it's an issue.

Using it for grammar: OK Using it to write generic stuff: OK if the content is correct Using it to sell yourself (e.g. application letters): dumb sht

No, I don't think less of them. They're early adopters (yay!), but I do think less of those who trust AI with the final edit. Instead I hope they pay attention to the following as they put on the finishing touches.

Mental load. We're familiar with the mistakes people make but we're still figuring out how AI gets things wrong. This detracts from the message because you start looking for mangled trees instead of trying to assemble the mental forest. => Writers should make sure AI's use is not detectable to the audience.

The other issue is not knowing if AI was used in first draft or just for polish, you're left wondering how much of the piece you're reading is human vs AI. Logical beings wouldn't care. It would just be about how well the piece executes its purpose. => Writers should make sure AI's use is not detectable to the audience.

We're not 100% logical though, we're also social and maybe this is a third aspect, that we don't know who we're hearing from. Is it a social being or a technological process? Does it care if I get it? => Writers should make sure AI's use is not detectable to the audience.

Guess, it's pretty simple.

What are PEDs?

AI definitely not help peoples... Majority of these "innovations" was / are created to raise a "stupid" generation, who can directed by the "big dogs" as they want... Sadly, but I think AI is not a good thing in many areas... But I hope it is just a short term narrative (me...naive)

Help, no. Do it for them. Yes.

The longer I watch these AI tools being used the less they seem like some magical intelligence. They are no more an AI than a calculator is. They are however a much more complex set of data and algorithms. I suspect that LLMs will become like calculators at some point in the future.

Businesses are already making heavy use of things like ChatGPT to help with their writing. I've experimented with this myself. Business writing is so formulaic that it is well suited for a computer to do it well. Creative writing is just that. Creative. But even there I can see a valid use of these tools to help get ideas flowing. But I could see it becoming a crutch.

I suspect in a generation people will chuckle at people looking down their nose at others over "AI" use just as people wouldn't think of expecting everyone to remember all their friend's phone numbers like we used to do.

Will it be good or bad for humanity? I guess that depends on how we use it. AI is just a tool. It isn't alive. It doesn't think. It will not suddenly decide to do anything. That BS fear mongering will be proven wrong. What could happen is that we use these tools to do really bad things but I believe that will be due to humans. Not tools. Machines.

It's cheating to use it to write FOR you since it is basically a brain drain that spins the word salad around a few times and spits it out and calls it unique.