I don’t know she’s effusive about it. She’s going to get her article published in the paper. She’s been calling sources and talking to people and getting the scoop. I guess the only way to be a journalist these days for local issues is to pay to go to journalism school.

I build websites for fun and delegate large portions of it to LLMs. Doesn't make it less fun.

Imagine if you are already a great writer, but want to learn more about asking questions, coming up with interesting angles. Then collaborating with an AI that does the grunt work seems a natural fit. You may also want to improve editing skills rather than writing skills. By saving time and energy on not writing, editing may become something that there is more time to really get good at.

In other courses, curiosity rather than mastery may be what is relevant. So again asking questions and getting somewhat reliable answers that skepticism should be applied to could be of great benefit. Obviously, if you want to get good at something that the AI is doing, then one needs to do the work first though the AI could be a great work questioner. The current unreliability could actually be an asset for those wishing to use it to learn in partnership with, much like working with peers is helpful because they may not be right either in contrast to working with someone who has already mastered a subject. Both have their places, of course.

Sounds a bit judgy to me