I have my own issues with generative AI, but it is good at some tasks—tasks that (if it weren't for the copyright theft, plagiarism, labor theft, and climate-destroying energy needs) would actually be worth talking about in terms of how they can improve our lives.
One thing generative AI is genuinely good at is producing English sentences that sound intelligent. Among other things, this means it can be good at basic editing—making your words sound correct and smart—and it can even provide a kind of blind, meaning-agnostic textual analysis and recommendations for improvement.
That's editing, right? You can get it for free?!
Well, sort of. As with most things in our world, you get what you pay for. The Washington Post tested five generative AIs on their ability to perform this kind of editing. None of them did better than a D+, and only one of them didn't "hallucinate."
Free? Yes (for now).
Good?
If you have no money or critique partners, and you have the time and patience to investigate the accuracy of every suggestion, then AI can provide you with a kind of editing. It can make you sound intelligible... but not great or unique—literally the average of what the internet has to offer.
What can a human editor do, then, that the AI can't? Well, at their best, a human editor can provide the following:
- A-level corrections, recommendations, and analysis
- Insightful comments from a human who understands your intention and meaning
- Experience that comes from being an editor, a writer, and a human
- Suggestions that maintain your unique voice and vision as an author
- Harsh truths to help you improve
- Revisions that don't make up facts out of nowhere
- Connection with a human who's rooting for you
No comments:
Post a Comment