7 ms·

> My argument, Claude’s sentences. It won some of the arguments along the way. The mistakes are still mine. From the footer. lol. lmao, even.

• bostonOU 1mo ago
  how is that any different than claude generating code? honest question
  • Azure88 1mo ago
    Because code is instructions to execute a program. It's not meant to be consumed as an end product itself, only its output, which is independent of what it's made from, and if written functionally correct, irrelevant for using the software. Articles are written to be directly consumed. That's why the writing matters there. The next question might be, why do people prefer reading human writing to AI writing. There are a few reasons. One is that because the person writing it is an actual person, they've imagined how the reader will take the content in and have made sure that it reads well. Different people will have different writing styles and you may prefer some over others, but generally they'll make it interesting, engaging, not ramble on, respect the readers attention, get to the point quickly. AI tends to put in a bunch of filler and not really make much of a point, or say something obvious as a conclusion. A second reason is that people want to feel connected to another person when reading something written by them. They might trust the person and build a mental image of them as they read, and let that further inform whether they agree with their opinions and recognize biases, and refine that image of the person to better understand if they can trust the opinions and perspectives in their writing. You can't do that with the output of an llm. In summary, LLMs are good for asking questions to when researching facts, producing functional output that is either right or wrong. They are also useful but not completely trustworthy when exploring ideas or asking opinions on things. And terrible when producing text meant for humans to read (including its own output a lot of the time in chats), and any kind of visual design beyond simple templates.