This is also why having LLMs “edit” your writing is often pernicious. LLM editing, unless managed extremely carefully, often involves rephrasings, added qualifiers, and swapped vocabulary in ways that meaningfully change the semantic content of your writing. Very often this is in unendorsed ways, but this can be hard to pick up on because the typical LLM writing style has a tendency to make people’s eyes slide off of it[5].
Hmm so I think this centrally depends on what you mean by editing? There’s
Give text to the LLM (with whatever instructions), then take its edited output
Tell the LLM to make suggestions about what to change in your text, then incorporate the suggestions to whatever extent you think makes sense—but do it entirely via manual editing, no copy-pasting
I’ve never done #1. I’ve never even considered doing #1, I think because the idea of publishing anything actually written by LLMs is just so emotionally yuck to me. But I do #2 all the time, to the point that not doing it seems like a weird decision for anything important. And I think #2 fundamentally avoids the problems you mentioned?
The second is definitely not falling into the central failure mode I described there, yeah; arguably people are just making a mistake if they’re not doing that for serious writing—enabling that kind of thing is exactly why we built the feature to allow LLMs to leave inline comments/etc on your posts by just giving them a link!
Hmm so I think this centrally depends on what you mean by editing? There’s
Give text to the LLM (with whatever instructions), then take its edited output
Tell the LLM to make suggestions about what to change in your text, then incorporate the suggestions to whatever extent you think makes sense—but do it entirely via manual editing, no copy-pasting
I’ve never done #1. I’ve never even considered doing #1, I think because the idea of publishing anything actually written by LLMs is just so emotionally yuck to me. But I do #2 all the time, to the point that not doing it seems like a weird decision for anything important. And I think #2 fundamentally avoids the problems you mentioned?
The second is definitely not falling into the central failure mode I described there, yeah; arguably people are just making a mistake if they’re not doing that for serious writing—enabling that kind of thing is exactly why we built the feature to allow LLMs to leave inline comments/etc on your posts by just giving them a link!