Except for the cases where no writing is better than LLM writing. The author's take seems ok to me, but what I struggle with most in AI writing is that it removes or abstracts away the intent of the original author. Not in every sentence and in every thought. But when a human says something, I can reason about why they said it the way they did. There are threads worth tugging on. 2 easy-to-understand examples: 1. when an ESL writer communicates something in awkward English, it's a fascinating glimpse into how they normally communicate about concepts. The meaning is usually not too difficult to infer and I can see how their language or culture affects how they see mine. It's very fun. 2. if an expert explains something and I get lost, that's usually a hint that my mental model could change to see the problem/solution more like they do.
But when a person expert or no uses an llm, information is being lost. If I misunderstand an llm's sentence, it is possible that "it knows what it's talking about", but with how frequently they don't know what they're talking about, I usually don't try and move on. It's not worth it.
In America, at least, though perhaps this applies more broadly, so many trends over the past decades all converge towards the lowering of the baseline levels of trust you should give towards a stranger (whether valid or not!). And llms have been a net-negative so far. We have exchanged some amount of trust for intelligence. And it didn't have to be an exchange.
I care less about llm disclosure and more about this: If you use an LLM for writing, please think sincerely about whether the output accurately represents what you would say and how you would say it to another person. Please avoid serving others nothingburgers and wordsalads. This has always been possible and it's easy to do it without realizing it with LLMs. The output can survive a scan, but dissolves upon further inspection.
tldr; make sure that what you publish is trustworthy.
It's funny how the life transformation in this article is: quitting a job and breaking up with a kind boyfriend against the advice of a parent. These aren't wrong, but... I'm not sold this is an improvement. Maybe this article is targeted at people who already know the author and trust her?
Looking at her bio, the only family connection I can find is, "Proud Mommy". For a "happiness and mortality expert", I would've expected her to say more in her bios across her sites about her loving husband and children. I'm not saying she's bad, I'm just saying that it would be more helpful if she, in general and in this article, talked more about what she's done outside of being a happiness expert. Why should we trust you? How do we know breaking up with this boyfriend was good? Even a comment about how that freed her up to find someone else who was truly better and worth committing to would be better than just selling us on this breakup on basis of her feeling they weren't right.
(And to be clear, I think feelings here are important. You don't have to enter into a relationship if you're not feeling it. A subconscious feeling can be onto something long before your mind is. But I feel that once you're in a relationship that's that intimate, feelings alone shouldn't end it.)
I am glad someone is doing something like this. Very cool to see a free market solution. I do wonder, how will they handle Instagram, Youtube, and X.com, the everything (incl. porn!) app?
It is also often a very bold claim to say "There is *no* evidence for X." The cases where you can truly say that are rare compared to how easily people (esp. non-experts) will say it. More often, it's more accurate to say, "I don't believe the arguments for X or evidence of X."
This is thoughtfully done!
I use canonreader.com on the web and The Literal Word bible app as an actual app that has one of the best UIs for reading. AndBible is really good for breadth and quality of resources.
I will add this to my rotation.
Also, I love to see a variety of fonts and the WEB version here.
Typing is better. But sometimes my hands are full. I've tried to use Claude Voice Mode while doing outdoor tasks away from my computer in my podcast listening time.
ChatGPT Advanced Voice Mode works fine, but Claude Voice is unusable, sadly. I'd rather talk to Claude! I would also like to try Gemini Live.
I wanted a stack where .md posts would look good by default, but I could make custom pages with javascript-based demos and interactivity trivially. I'm experimenting with and like the Astro ecosystem so far. So far the defaults seem intelligent and I couldn't believe how fast setting up pagefind was and how much better the results were than the other static site search engines I had tried.
(I'm coming from the Svelte and Sveltekit ecosystem, which I also like.)