[JackFr]

> As a side note, if anyone I'm communicating with - personally or in business - sends responses that sound like they were written by ChatGPT 3.5, 4o, GPT-5-low, etc, I don't take anything they write seriously anymore.

What if they are a very limited English speaker, using the AI to tighten up their responses into grammatical, idiomatic English?

[baobun]

I'd rather have broken grammar and an honest and useful meta-signal than botched semantics.

Also that better not be a sensitive conversation or contain personal details or business internals of others...

Just don't.

[NewsaHackO]

But the meta singal you get is detrimental to the writer, so why wouldn't they want to mask it?

[habinero]

If I think you're fluent, I might think you're an idiot when really you just don't understand.

If I know they struggle with English, I can simplify my vocabulary, speak slower/enunciate, and check in occasionally to make sure I'm communicating in a way they can follow.

[NewsaHackO]

Both of those options are exactly what the writer wants to avoid though, and the reason they are using AI for grammar correction in the first place.

[habinero]

Thank you for demonstrating my point.

[baobun]

Security and ethics.

If those don't apply, as mentioned, if I realize I will as mentioned also ignore them if I can and judge their future communications as malicious, incompetent, inconsiderate, and/or meaningless.

[NewsaHackO]

But if they are using it for copywriting/grammar edits, how would you know? For instance, have I used AI to help correct grammar for these repilies?

[natebc]

I'd rather have words from a humans mind full stop.