What if AI didn't make you a bad writer, but a better thinker?

I’ve been using AI to write with great success. Mostly business documents. My general process is this:<p>Think of the concept I want to write about as well as the supporting evidence for the topic. Ask ChatGPT to write me something in my target format using the topic and supporting evidence as input. What I get back is essentially a well-written skeleton that I can use to fill in additional details. Finally, I pass my revisions through ChatGPT to touch up any errors, rephrase wordy things, etc. I lightly edit the final draft and I usually have an excellent result.

I look forward to most tech writing done with AI. Writing documentation and requirements requires a lot of effort to keep consistent and up to date. Having an AI look at your code and config and then write a nice report will easily beat 99% of all tech docs in companies.

The spate of AI &quot;artwork&quot; I have seen over the past few months has seemed to me to be good &quot;prompts&quot; for artists. Many of what I have seen has a germ of something interesting in it — but is often missing in other regards.<p>An obvious example that comes to mind are the recent &quot;Jordowsky Tron&quot; images [1]. Any art director could comb those images, consider changes here, there — and end up with something better than the AI.<p>I guess how derivative you think the final results are depends in part on how much &quot;artist&#x27;s prerogative&quot; the art director employs, how derivative you think the AI prompts are to begin with, how derivative you see <i>all</i> art....<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.facebook.com&#x2F;groups&#x2F;officialmidjourney&#x2F;posts&#x2F;454166656874904&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.facebook.com&#x2F;groups&#x2F;officialmidjourney&#x2F;posts&#x2F;454...</a>

I&#x27;m hoping for a tool that cannot just correct my English style, but can also play the advocatus diaboli in a little speech bubble while I&#x27;m writing philosophy papers. It ought to constantly try to disprove me, though only on a per-paragraph basis and by making mild suggestions (&quot;Could you give an example here?&quot;, &quot;On the other hand,...&quot;, &quot;What if...&quot;, &quot;Isn&#x27;t this what &lt;X&gt; calls...?&quot;, &quot;Isn&#x27;t there a missing premise in this argument?&quot;,...).

&gt; There will be fewer barriers to entry and greater understanding of all that has come before, Ultimately, there will be less noise on the internet.<p>Given the amount of noise from people churning out low quality content today, I find this unlikely.

Good news is I will be able to ask GPT-like models to summarize me all these articles and I won&#x27;t have to sift through them.

I liked the post&#x27;s title more than the article&#x27;s contents. It got me wondering about the difference between language and thought, if there actually is any. Is thought just unspoken language? Do we think if we don&#x27;t know a language?<p>Is there a subset of any human language that can be described by a formal regular grammar without giving up the expressiveness of human language? Is there a notion of &quot;Turing completeness&quot; but for thought rather than computation?

Yep, yet another post on AI and the future of content creation.<p>Looking at it from a different angle - what if AI could search your internal docs, and help you problem-solve? Aka help you exploit past knowledge to inform future decisions?<p>The hope: GPT will democratize creation, not fill the internet with shitty articles.

I was thinking of something along this way a while ago: &quot;what if we had an AI that we didn&#x27;t merely use to obtain answers but rather to ask intelligent questions, so that it would help to build self criticism when developing a product, service, piece of code, etc?

The current chatbots are kind of like a calculator for language—they’re not going to do <i>all</i> your work for you, but they’ll definitely speed and streamline the process.

I wonder if this article is written also with AI help? For instance ChatGPT usually ends the last paragraph with &quot;Ultimately&quot;. As a side note I&#x27;ve also seen sites use SEO by writing possible search terms into the article itself.

I&#x27;m increasingly frustrated by the amount of people willing to give up control of their own thought processing. At what point do you decide, I&#x27;m good enough and don&#x27;t need to improve, I&#x27;ll make the AI do it for me!

I had a conversation with ChatGPT yesterday where I came up with the first few episodes for a new season of 24. I provided a set of events that happen in episode 1, 2, 3 and 4 and it &quot;rewrote&quot; it to sound better. Which it basically did. Then I let it &quot;provide a compelling episode 5&quot;. here is is:<p>In episode 5 of the new season of 24, Jack Bauer&#x27;s mission to infiltrate and take down the terrorist group leads him to a critical moment of decision. With the help of his team and his contact in Moscow, Jack manages to uncover the group&#x27;s plans for a major attack on the city and learns that the group has a mole in the White House. Jack must now decide whether to reveal this information to his team and risk blowing his cover, or keep it to himself and try to take down the group alone.<p>Meanwhile, the White House and CTU are in a state of high alert as they race to track down the mole and stop the terrorist attack. The Vice President and acting President is under pressure to handle the crisis and maintain the illusion of Jack&#x27;s kidnapping while trying to find a way to bring him home safely.<p>As the clock ticks down, Jack must make a difficult decision that will have serious consequences. He has to choose between his loyalty to his country or his loyalty to his team. The episode is filled with intense action and nail-biting suspense as Jack and his team race against the clock to stop the terrorist attack and clear his name before it&#x27;s too late. The episode also features a dramatic twist that keeps the audience guessing until the very end.<p>OK, but but actually it quickly devolved into generic description of many episodes of 24. The human creative element can&#x27;t be captured by GPT yet.<p>By the way this totally should happen: Jack is president, has to fake his kidnapping because of a plot coming out of russia, meanwhile apparently the mole is the first lady.

This is an extremely insightful article. Strong agree with the core points made that these are copilots or co-processors rather than replacements. Maybe at some point in the future we will all be replaced (sound familiar?) but for now these are tools that can help us make progress as a society at a much faster rate

The dialectic is amazing. To get the best result, it forces one to be constantly skeptical—yet open and creative.

AI will take a while to wash over the masses while Byung Chul Han sees no improvement from an aphorism assistant since he already thinks in aphorisms organically.<p>I&#x27;ve benefitted since I started using GPT in my own idiosyncratic process last summer since it identified and fixed my problem of writing sideways, i.e. breadth first.<p>I could get this from a good, old fashioned human education but my professor friends in the humanities have already resigned tenured positions.<p>I worry that similar to HR becoming human robots the long term impact is that we trade anthropomorphism for robotomorphism.

I do sometimes wonder to what extent and at which point should we start questioning the reality of the discourse happening here in HN.<p>However, in my work, one of the things I’m tasked with doing is the tedious process of writing and rewriting instructions for training exercises. A non-trivial amount of unnecessary energy is spent on restructuring the grammatical structure and flow of this text.<p>I seriously wouldn’t mind focusing on the details and let an AI do the work.

This is my first time hearing about Slite knowledge base. I think this is a great idea based on search summaries. However, the access privilege bit covered in the video seems technically tricky. How do you know that chatgpt isn’t leaking out some private information in its responses, unless every user has their own private model?

I can rewrite every book in existence but what is the point if everyone can do it?

I don&#x27;t really buy this argument. If clear writing is clear thinking, what is a complete disengagement from the process of writing equivalent to?

So obvious, so good!

AIA artificial intelligence assistance. Definitely help to better think, structure (and search).

I think AI can make people better thinkers for sure! Look at what AlphaZero did for Chess - it basically showed that humanistic ideas can still thrive at the highest levels of computer chess (think like intentionally hanging a piece, dynamic positional play, trapping opposition pieces, sacrifices that don&#x27;t pay off for several turns, etc...) rather than brute forcing a position. I&#x27;m sure the top players all learned quite a lot about the game through watching AlphaZero, and I&#x27;m sure they&#x27;ve all implemented those lessons into their own games.

I recall that they said the same about IBM Watson, especially after it won jeopardy. Now, no one talks about it any longer.