>>3811935
Depending on the model and prompt in question, AI can actually produce some pretty competent prose on a sentence-to-sentence level. Sure, if left running for long enough you'll inevitably run into repetitive patterns since the slop machine is built to value stability, but it's not like you can't fix it by some light editing. A better read than what someone like Nicky puts out, at least.
Where AI writing actually collapses is in everything to do with the fact it's not doing any actual thinking. It can't handle a mental model of a world contextualizing the text that is not explicitly spelled out within that text, anything subtextual, any long-term planning like a character arc, even something as basic as a persistent character voice. Pretty much anything that requires sustained intentionality is a no-go. It's decent at "localized coherence", but if you want anything more than a decent scene or two — it's more or less useless.
>b-but it le saves le time
That's abjectly untrue. Trying to tardwrangle it into anything presentable is so time-consuming you'd be better off learning how to write yourself at that point.
t.