I agree that It may enable you to share ideas a little faster (although I’m not sure by how much). Most individual good ideas could be expressed in a couple of paragraphs if need be.
I don’t buy though that you “wouldn’t be able to share them” otherwise. I’m happy for AI to help with your thoughts and ideas (brainstorming, ideating, research), just not with your final writing. I’m not convinced at all yet that AI is “enabling the proliferation of good thoughts and ideas” in a significant way. Can you share any evidence of that? I’ve not been very impresses with posts on the forum here that heavily use AI
I don’t think writing the final draft without AI is a huge barrier to sharing thoughts quickly and effectively. Insofar as it might be, I’d take the tradeoff the other way.
Its interesting that this is so polarising. I’m certainly one of those witch hunters at the moment at least. A year ago I was more OK with AI writing but I’m now vehemently against it after seeing Linkedin, which 2 years ago was a pretty interesting platform, deteriorate to low quality discourse full of AI slop in both the posts and the comments. On that platform at least it has lowered the quality of ideas and discourse, not improved them. I hope Substack doesn’t go the same way.
I have experience writing things with and without AI. At least for me, it can be a very difficult process trying to convey things as clearly and effectively as I can. Perhaps I am being unreasonable in putting that much time into the process and perhaps other people are just much better at writing clearly and effectively without AI. But I can say that I would not produce a lot of the content that I produce without AI being able to shorten the process significantly.
I agree that It may enable you to share ideas a little faster (although I’m not sure by how much). Most individual good ideas could be expressed in a couple of paragraphs if need be.
I don’t buy though that you “wouldn’t be able to share them” otherwise. I’m happy for AI to help with your thoughts and ideas (brainstorming, ideating, research), just not with your final writing. I’m not convinced at all yet that AI is “enabling the proliferation of good thoughts and ideas” in a significant way. Can you share any evidence of that? I’ve not been very impresses with posts on the forum here that heavily use AI
I don’t think writing the final draft without AI is a huge barrier to sharing thoughts quickly and effectively. Insofar as it might be, I’d take the tradeoff the other way.
Its interesting that this is so polarising. I’m certainly one of those witch hunters at the moment at least. A year ago I was more OK with AI writing but I’m now vehemently against it after seeing Linkedin, which 2 years ago was a pretty interesting platform, deteriorate to low quality discourse full of AI slop in both the posts and the comments. On that platform at least it has lowered the quality of ideas and discourse, not improved them. I hope Substack doesn’t go the same way.
I have experience writing things with and without AI. At least for me, it can be a very difficult process trying to convey things as clearly and effectively as I can. Perhaps I am being unreasonable in putting that much time into the process and perhaps other people are just much better at writing clearly and effectively without AI. But I can say that I would not produce a lot of the content that I produce without AI being able to shorten the process significantly.