Nailed it.
Comment on ChatGPT’s latest stylistic quirk is sinister, infuriating – and absolutely everywhere
Juice@midwest.social 2 days ago
This is so silly. The way to explain a concept is to explain it in both the positive and the negative. Its the first steps to understanding, knowing not just what a thing is, but what it isnt.
I am not defending AI, but this writer is a loon. It isnt a stylistic choice, it is the most basic form of critical thinking. AI is not doing critical thinking, it is copping the style of an effective pedagogy.
its_me_xiphos@beehaw.org 2 days ago
eleijeep@piefed.social 2 days ago
But do you not see how redundant the construction is in the given examples? You’re right that it has a place, but that place is not literally every paragraph you write.
An LLM doesn’t understand the rules of when certain linguistic constructions enhance the communication of the writing, it just repeats a pattern that existed in the training data in places where it’s not necessary. That’s why it is so jarring and inhuman to read.
Juice@midwest.social 2 days ago
Yeah I see it but thats not what the problem is. The author isnt saying “ai’s points of contrast arent relevant or helpful” its calling out the construction itself. The author complains about the ineffective writing of ai, and then names the wrong problem. Its like saying "the problem with ai writing is ai keeps usimg the word “the”. No that isnt the problem! There are problems and that isnt the one. It isnt a stylistic quirk, its the way the quirk is used that stands out, just like you said.
But actually I’m just having a laugh trying to fit in as many “its not x, its y” comments as I can. I’m all about criticizing ai but theres so much to actually criticize and this misses the mark