It changed generating a comment from something that would have probably taken 1.5 hours of work to something that took about 15 minutes and generated what I wanted to say.
Although I can’t directly compare the ChatGPT version to a hypothetical directly-written version of the comment, my hunch is that the former is about twice as long as the latter as the latter would have been. It’s pretty common for AI to need many more words to express the same idea than a reasonably skilled human author. So in a sense, I think generative AI use often shifts the time burden of the author-reader joint enterprise from the author to the readers. This may or may not be a good tradeoff on the whole, but it is worth considering both sides.
My general take is that content authored with that level of AI assistance should be flagged as such, so the reader can make their own decision about whether to engage with it.
I do think the comment would have been much better received if it was more concise and simple to read (regardless of how it was written), see The value of content density
Although I can’t directly compare the ChatGPT version to a hypothetical directly-written version of the comment, my hunch is that the former is about twice as long as the latter as the latter would have been. It’s pretty common for AI to need many more words to express the same idea than a reasonably skilled human author. So in a sense, I think generative AI use often shifts the time burden of the author-reader joint enterprise from the author to the readers. This may or may not be a good tradeoff on the whole, but it is worth considering both sides.
My general take is that content authored with that level of AI assistance should be flagged as such, so the reader can make their own decision about whether to engage with it.
I do think the comment would have been much better received if it was more concise and simple to read (regardless of how it was written), see The value of content density