|
|
|
|
|
by hiworld6543
13 days ago
|
|
Saying the article was AI assisted is also wrong. Current consumer models can read a vehicle user manual in moments and indicate probable writing errors. This article had a few stylistic errors (or choices) that were irrelevant, except to prove the author is human. If he/she had used AI even in an assistive manner, knowing the nitpicking behavior of the intended audience, it would have had none. Also, the author’s other public writings have similar errors/choices in style. When “consumer AI” writes or rewrites, it’s impossible for it to mimic one’s writing style so similarly. Literally impossible, because it can’t disregard everything else that it “knows” (voluminous training, guardrails, interface design, social boundaries) for it to
1. Disregard all that training after processing the user’s prompt
2. output a complete article in the user’s style
3. Turn back on its knowledge
4. then continue to function.
That’s just not how consumer products work. |
|