Over 60% of Writers Already Use AI in Their Writing Workflow

More accurately: 60% of hackernoon community respondents (n=300) have made use of AI in writing/copywriting work.

Of course it doesn't have the same pizzazz but it's important context as community members of this particular website might be more likely to be aware of AI advances than the median writer.

All in all, just a garbage article from a community poll. Part of this article was itself written by chatGPT.

At first I didn't get it.

I never have a hard time to write things with words for the average stuff, which is what the AI is good at. It's always faster for me to type it. And for the hard stuff, AI cannot help (yet).

For programming having help for the average stuff saves me time. But for words? That's my natural way of expressing thoughts, why would I need speed up with the most natural thing in the world?

But then I saw some of my friends use it, and I understood.

Most people suck at writing.

In fact, they suck at communicating in words in general. I started to pay attention, and realized that most of the discussion is not even proper French or complete sentences most of the time. The tone, the gestures, grunts and context are all used by every day people to express essential basic ideas.

And we rarely express anything beyond basic idea in days to days activity, no matter how smart we think we are, life is mostly mundane stuff.

And unlike me, they didn't have to write a ton of paperwork in their life, or articles, they have no training.

They struggle with the medium like a fish trying to climb a tree.

For them, GPT is a savior for any formal writing task.

Consequently, these days:

Over 60% of articles read like they were written by AI.

Slightly less snarky response:

I think it's odd that so many people fear AI stealing their writing jobs. I think I have a pretty good feel for when an article has been written by AI. Although, to be fair, there are enough crappy sausage meat listicles written by humans that read the same.

The big failing, as I see it, is that [at present] AIs are programmed to provide balanced "pros and cons" type neutral output. But, the reality is that many people don't want to read balance and neutrality. They want their own prejudices reinforced. Hence why people read newspapers / watch news channels / etc. that reflect their own political biases. Or hang about on social media with people who think like they do.

Until AI writers can respond to a prompt with "Yes, you're right. <insert object of hate> is a complete fucking waste of space...!" it's always going to produce insipid and uninspiring articles --even if they are "factually accurate".

Nice