annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
It's not about deception if someone admits they use AI to assist them, and that AI was used for their final result.
It is, however, about losing the ability to do their own thinking. As this writer puts it:
The problem with writing with A.I. is that it’s mentally enfeebling — an escalator toward a result when you really need to make a daily habit of taking the stairs.
"Words become hollow. Imagine the father of the bride turning to A.I. to help him write his daughter’s wedding toast: What the A.I. can supply in eloquence it subtracts in effort and authenticity. Now imagine that the daughter learns that the speech was written by A.I.: Wouldn’t she be right to be disappointed, if not insulted?
Many would argue there’s a big difference between using A.I. for something as significant and personal as a wedding speech and using it for the boring and frequently exhausting tasks of writing, say, routine office memos. But the intellectual muscle that’s exercised in everyday writing is the same one used for the writing that matters. We become better writers by the constant effort that mundane writing demands. We become better thinkers by investing into that writing a degree of attention we’d never give it if we relinquished the task to A.I. We become more creative when we learn how to put a personal stamp even on routine things, making them unmistakably our own."
I can often (I'm sure not always) tell when posters are using AI no matter how little, when I've been reading their posts for years and are familiar with their ways of expressing themselves. 'Just for organizing thoughts. Just for smoothing out. Just for editing.'What a shame. Attaining a certain false eloquence or organization is no substitute for the hard work of synthesizing your own learning using your own brain. Using AI for online discussions is laziness, pretending to be cutting edge.