Well, there are plenty of long takes on X which are obviously based on authors’ ideas but LLM-generated (even before ones runs them through a detector) and still get pretty popular, audience not smelling an LLM. Do you count that as good or bad writing? I honestly don’t enjoy reading them for some reason even when I agree the underlying ideas make sense, but on the other hand, these authors reached a wider audience than they would presumably have without an LLM
Not sure if you meant to ask Justis that? My own standards for writing are (as I understand them) mostly independent of information about the author (there are some exceptions like autobiographies, or knowing the author has overcome some incredible hurdle to be able to write it, but they only apply in a small percentage of cases).
I also, separately, don’t think popularity on X is a very useful proxy for writing quality.
Well, there are plenty of long takes on X which are obviously based on authors’ ideas but LLM-generated (even before ones runs them through a detector) and still get pretty popular, audience not smelling an LLM. Do you count that as good or bad writing? I honestly don’t enjoy reading them for some reason even when I agree the underlying ideas make sense, but on the other hand, these authors reached a wider audience than they would presumably have without an LLM
Not sure if you meant to ask Justis that? My own standards for writing are (as I understand them) mostly independent of information about the author (there are some exceptions like autobiographies, or knowing the author has overcome some incredible hurdle to be able to write it, but they only apply in a small percentage of cases).
I also, separately, don’t think popularity on X is a very useful proxy for writing quality.