re:On AI-enhanced Writing

Pablo posted a very well put together reaction to another post regarding the use of LLMs in the writing process.

Pablo did an excellent job of conveying the thoughts I've had around this subject. I've often felt "if you didn't bother writing it, why would I bother reading it?", and while Arun argues in their post that they enhance their writing with AI, I don't feel it's truly their thoughts at that point. It's devoid of what makes writing worthwhile.

In software development, the code is not the artifact, it's the user facing piece the code builds that provides value. The code is a means to an end, a no-code built tool can provide just as much value as if it was coded in C++. This is something that's taken awhile for me to realize as I've come to terms with using AI to assist in development.

Writing is not the same as coding. The words you type are not a means to an end, they are the direct product. Words are a reflection of you and how you think. The exact words you choose, the structure you assemble, even the mistakes you make are uniquely you. To outsource this to a tool that generates based on how other people think is to give up what makes your writing a unique fingerprint of your mind.

If you're writing a corporate blog, landing page copy, LinkedIn posts etc then sure, go ahead and use AI. That writing is meant to be bland, and let's be honest, nobody but machines is reading it anyway. But if you're writing something meaningful like a personal blog post, an academic paper or a book, that should reflect you, otherwise what's the point?