I'd rather read the prompt

This article argues against using Large Language Models (LLMs) for writing tasks like assignments, blog posts, or reviews. The author contends that human writing, even if imperfect, is more valuable because it conveys original thought and experience, whereas LLM output is often verbose, generic, lacks substance, and hinders true communication and learning. Reasons for LLM use (perceived unimportance of the task, belief in superior AI writing) are refuted, emphasizing that authentic human expression is preferable to AI-generated text.

This blog post critiques the use of AI-generated writing, especially in academic and online discourse. The author argues that AI-generated responses often lack originality, substance, and genuine human perspective. Key points include:

Overuse in Academic Settings: Students sometimes submit AI-generated work, which lacks depth and critical thinking. Instructors can recognize the style but often find it challenging to take action against it.
Reasons for AI Reliance: Some use AI writing tools because they believe assignments are mere obstacles, think AI produces better writing, or see writing as a low-priority task.
AI vs. Original Thought: The author argues that writing should be about expressing one's own ideas, not regurgitating AI-generated text.
The Problem with "Vibe Coding": In programming, relying on AI-generated code without understanding the logic behind it leads to insecure, poorly structured applications.
Writing Should Be Human-Centric: The author believes that all creative work should reflect individual experience. AI output often strips away the originality and intention behind writing.

Overall, the article is a call to value human writing and critical thinking over AI-generated text, emphasizing that genuine expression is always more meaningful than automated responses. Let me know if you'd like a deeper breakdown of any part!

#Writing #AI #LLM #Authenticity