People think AI is a bad editor (I personally don't), here's your argument under a particularly harsh version of that framing:
Saying an article is of inferior quality just because editing was done by my 13 year old nephew is like saying a book is lower quality just because it was printed rather than written by hand
Obviously, this doesn't work because the content is changing. Printing a piece vs writing it by hand doesn't change the content, only the medium of transmission.
If your battery is replaceable, you can still decide to throw the phone away and add to the pile of e-waste.
The legislation allows both choices, at the cost of higher prices.
This comment is every policy discussion. I like [X POLICY] but [Y POLICY] would be miles better.
Although [Y POLICY] is much further reaching and has never been tried at anything like the scale of a country, it's sort of similar to [Z POLICY] - which was tried for 2 years.
You know exactly what is meant. I don't think we need the long disclaimer at the beginning about the inefficiency of the English language in this domain and the extreme likelihood that it has no qualia.
We're talking about the observed behaviour of these systems (even the word "behaviour" is fraught!) in a way that's natural.
Saying an article is of inferior quality just because editing was done by my 13 year old nephew is like saying a book is lower quality just because it was printed rather than written by hand
Obviously, this doesn't work because the content is changing. Printing a piece vs writing it by hand doesn't change the content, only the medium of transmission.