Skip to content

Comment on A ChatGPT-authored article hit the front page of HN this morning

Comments

Per author's comment on the HN thread:

I am the person that wrote this, and used GPT-3 and a few other writing tools to help me wordsmith it. All the points, however, is original work and not AI generated. I am not a native English speaker, so I have been using these tools to avoid awkward sentences/paragraphs.

How is this qualitatively different from using tools like Grammarly (which in their premium versions suggest style, not just grammar fixes) which themselves brag about being AI powered?

We're not talking about "write me an article about Foo" - the author has provided detailed notes and presumably selected good-sounding output choices (they might be lying but that's another issue).

Are we, software developers, founders and entrepreneurs, in the business of disrupting others and automating away their jobs with computers, now so outraged something like this can be successfully automated?

I have seen human copywriters producing much worse content than what ChatGPT does based on good prompts. Why on Earth should we not automate that?

I have seen human copywriters producing much worse content than what ChatGPT does based on good prompts. Why on Earth should we not automate that?

Because then it gets even cheaper to spam the general population with advertisements and marketing fluff, and criminals might even be tempted to use GPT to automate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advance-fee_scam email exchanges.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.