[ori_b]

If you drop the premise of writing, drop the premise that you need something well written. Just give me the same information you would have given the LLM.

[apsurd]

But a non well-written prompt is not a good prompt. What are you really going to do with a shit prompt? It's meta: we need better writers all the way down.

[necovek]

Whatever the prompt is, it is still the only information of value reflecting actual decisions made.

Everything coming out of LLM on any prompt is either someone else's decisions or same thing reworded in a different way.

[ori_b]

Yes. But if it's good enough for an LLM it's good enough for me.

If you really feel the need, you can attach the LLM output as an appendix. I probably won't read it.

[tomjen3]

Do you really want five minutes of audio of me rambling, then some instructions for how to split it up and organise it?

Plenty of people make LLMs make text longer, but writing a short accurate text with the essential points is much harder.

[anon-3988]

What is the difference between you putting your 5 minute monologue into the LLM to summarize it versus me doing it?

[antasvara]

I know what I'm trying to say, so I can sanity check the output. You can't, unless you listen to the monologue.

That's why I disagree with people that say "just give me whatever you gave the LLM." That's only useful if you, the writer of the prompt, have no intention of looking at the LLM output before sending it.

[ori_b]

I can run it through voice recognition just fine.

[esafak]

Do you really want to read the whole conversation between the author and computer? I don't use AI to write prose but if I did I'd treat it like a critical editor so reading all that would not save you time.

[yoz-y]

Any time I stumbled on AI writing; in comments, work or articles, it was painfully obvious that not a single person has read it, including the author.