[standardUser]

Anyone who has spent time with AI chatbots knows how often they are just completely wrong, often in surprising and confusing ways. It's hard enough to parse articles for accuracy and coherency without first passing them through as random error-adding machine.

[px43]

Humans are worse. Obviously if you don't know how to discern garbage data from legit data, you're going to have a bad time, but these emerging tools are strictly better than anything that has existed before.

[standardUser]

The range of errors we expect from humans is more narrow, more relatable and we have more experience parsing them. Adapting to parse AI-written material will require developing new skills, and I'd argue those skills will be more difficult to develop because the errors/inconsistencies generated by AI are not as relatable to humans as errors introduced by humans.