I just can't seem to stay interested and read LLM text. It just seems to lack going somewhere, its information density is often really low and its full of odd isms that I don't find very interesting to read. I don't have a good radar for detecting the various LLM particular speech patterns but everytime I have an issue with an article there is always people talking about how its clearly AI written.

I find the same thing with written results out of AI "research", it is a slog to read through it and most of it can be skipped even if it can sometimes be useful its an unenjoyable read.

> As more people delegate writing to LLMs they will also delegate thinking and comprehension to LLMs. I don't want to do that, where's the fun of writing then?

I enjoy cooking from scratch, and I really don't like frozen foods, microwave/TV dinners, or even DoorDashing

but we're past complaining/arguing/shaming folks who don't cook every meal from scratch

you know what, I don't prefer eating it, but if my next door neighbor loves microwaving frozen $3 burritos, then go ahead

to some people, food is art, creativity, life to others, food is fuel

also applies to writing and thinking

i noticed something similar yet different. because, sadly, most of what i read today is llm output (the chain of thoughts, or the summary at the end of a big chunk or work), i tend to "adopt" this style in my writing, hence, writing as an llm without using one. humans are an amazing creatures at copying stuff and adapting to our environment

One reason it grates is that it is our brain's way of telling us that there is nothing to be gained from engaging the material; it is trite.

> But if I want to communicate with humans, my humanity has to shine (or at least ooze) out of my prose.

Yeah. I want to be able to touch a human being (or at least have one touch me) through the words. LLMs poison that, even if a human prompted the LLM.

Translation... I think I object to translation less than Martin does. There's a human back there, and they're writing all the words, and then an LLM is translating them. The LLM may not translate them perfectly, but they aren't going to introduce "load-bearing" when it wasn't there.

The bit about using LLM when you're writing for a bureaucratic process rather than a human was interesting, at least to me. I hadn't thought of it that way before, but I think it makes sense.

[dead]