It's sad that people perfectly capable of expressing their thoughts in English on platforms such as LinkedIn are still letting AI write for them. It's understandable when it's complex thoughts that need connecting and structuring to deliver a coherent message. But often it is plain content generated based on a broad idea. It's often just reluctance to put in the time and effort.
And AI with its typical articulation styles does well to leave its mark - talking in abstractions, giving fundas in third person instead of stating directly, telling us what something is not before telling us what it is, telling us what something happens to be rather than being something else, and so on. The patterns are so easily visible now that AI generated content has become difficult to read and follow. If LLMs really learnt from the best human-written text, why did these patterns emerge? It's possible they'll be gone in future versions, and perhaps they are already being handled to some extent in paid versions, but these patterns are sticky and persistent.
Yet, it's not just about the language and patterns. The beauty and power of thought sharing lies in its originality and genuine human articulation. After experimenting a fair bit with content from LLMs, I strongly believe they can't express like we do, and we do it the best. And we should do it when we can, instead of letting them do it for us and settling for something that we'd rather done better.
