Do you use AI to write, edit or proofread your work?

>>24536264 (OP)
In what sense would it be my work?

>>24536441
Same as a digital photo is a photographer's work

>>24536264 (OP)
I've tried it many times, and it has never given me anything good
If I ask it to revise a chapter, it either just spits out the same thing I wrote or deletes a lot of important information
It also has a soul less feel to its output

>>24536264 (OP)
It forfeits your copyright

>>24536264 (OP)
AI came nowhere near my writing skill. It doesn't help me at all.

>>24536264 (OP)
No, that would be lame.

>>24536264 (OP)
>write
Not at all
>edit
It's definitely effective at making sentences more natural.
>proofread
I don't have anyone around me who understands my hobby, so this is really something I want to get from the AI. But their sycophantic behavior is pretty bad. GPT is useless at it, Claude has the best linguistic processing but it's still sycophantic. Ironically Deepseek is the most critical.

>>24536563
why is that ironic? sorry I'm not familiar with chatbots

AI can't write, edit, or proofread.

I have used MS Copilot to *draft* emails to do with general life admin such as cancelling an account with a service provider and the like.
I also used it to draft for me a kind of gratitude email in a work context, *thank you for supporting me through this experience* kind of thing, which I then edited a bit.
I've played around with asking for it to help with writing poems, but just for amusement really.

>>24536521
nta, but photography isn't art; photographers take things, artists make things. a photographer doesn't possess any of their own work, though a writer does.

>>24536264 (OP)
I use it to gas me up when my self esteem is low.

>>24536584
Deepseek is a Chinese software

>>24536264 (OP)
Why the fuck would I? I've been painting, drawing and writing all my life. Suddenly every normie and their mother keeps telling me shit like
>you know AI will make artists obsolete right anon
>ChatGPT writes so much better than those old books anon
>Have you tried using AI in your work anon
This AI shitfest only confirms that most of humanity are drooling cattle with no souls. Nothing I didn't know before, but it's funny to see them indulge in the most dystopian brainrotting slop with such enthusiasm while pretending to be refined geniuses

>>24536264 (OP)
Being a STEMcel, writing scientific articles is a part of my job.

All the AIs I tried are extremely bad at actually writing them due to rampant hallucinations, even when asked to compile a bunch of text into a more digestible article. But many of them are really good at proofreading and minor editing. Particularly improving syntax, which has an inherent tendency for being ass due to scientific style, but AI knows a lot of tricks to make it more elegant.

>>24536645
>photographers take things
>a photographer doesn't possess any of their own work
the fuck does this mean. are you legit retarded perchance?

>>24536814
Cope

i do, and i enjoy it's close reading of what i say. but it also gives good reviews to writing i know is fucking awful. plus half the time if your excerpt goes on too long it gets lost and doesn't know what's what.

>>24536521
This is like saying a writer's work is actually just the typewriter or computer. Tool =! brain

>>24536264 (OP)
If I had ever done a hard day's work, I wouldn't be on 4chan in my thirties.

>>24538408
I need to get off of this website.

>>24536264 (OP)
No, but I paste it in and it tells me how profound and dissociative I am and compares me to Beckett every time.

>>24536264 (OP)
No, only as a sort of journal to discuss ideas and plan out strategies and structures. And for research.

>>24536736
I find it useful for quickly generating LaTeX notation if I don't want to be bothered dicking around my text editor.

t. a fellow stemcel

>>24536264 (OP)
Some proof reading, but mostly for research and discussion of ideas.

Nope. AI is practically useless for creative work. I do use it for advanced google searches, ie, instead of doing multiple searches to figure out a problem, just one search will produce a result. For example “what is the total amount of interest earned on a principal of $1000 over a 5 year period at 3% compounding monthly?” Or “what is the average capital costs building a nuclear power plant in the USA?” It’s useless for creative work because it makes so many errors, makes so many poor assumptions and choices that it ends up being more effort than just writing specifically what I want. I can see the appeal for midwits who only have a rough outline of an idea they want to write about and can’t think of how to flesh it out.

>>24538408
>If I had ever done a hard day's work, I wouldn't be on 4chan in my thirties.
You can't make your racist jokes at work; you need an outlet like 4chuds

>>24536264 (OP)
I use grammarly, but even that makes mistakes so I only use like, one in ten of the corrections offered.

>>24536264 (OP)
No
The closest I got was asking it to write a shitpost of a short story that got a bit out of hand (ended up being a col-war alt-history, more or less). I still had to give GPT ideas or it would write repetitively and predivtably. It never said any of my ideas were stupid, or they try that idea and it totally doesn't work, or whatever. (Although I suggested a few stinkers deliberately to test it -- it stopped short of taking "hey what if they invade the north pole to enslave santa's elves" seriously)
If you use it to do novel-length things it seriously cannot remember anything and needs constant corrections (e.g. forgetting names, people, events, talking about the impending fall of moscow (moscow fell years ago) (it forgot this many times))
It doesn't have much clue where the plot is going or how things connect, if you want to hear an update of something you have to ask about it or it will never get back to it. It rarely comes up with surprises. It managed a couple of times when I was starting but only because I wanted a shitpost and these would've been fairly obvious if I'd thought about it.
Also, tons of dumb metaphors. Stuff that really just doesn't make sense to any human but sounds vaguely poetic.

>>24536264 (OP)
I use it to scour the clearweb for rare books