To me, the best first sentence of any piece of journalism is the one in Joan Didion’s 1987 book, Miami, which begins like this: “Havana vanities come to dust in Miami.”

I love that sentence and that propulsive first chapter so much that I once sat down to try to figure out how she did it. I looked at the sentences one at a time to assess what purpose each one was serving, and I counted how many of them Didion had needed to accomplish each thing she wanted to accomplish. Then I thought about how she figured out what order to put them in to have maximum page-turning impact. And then I compared all of it unfavorably with the flailing and feeble way in which I would have pursued the same goals. I marked up my copy of the book in a somewhat desperate fashion and then became depressed.

That type of copying is pretty normal, and they teach it in school. It’s how you learn (and how you become depressed). But in the age of generative AI, there are many new kinds of copying. For instance, Wired reported last week on a tool offered by Grammarly, which briefly offered users the opportunity to put their writing through something called “Expert Review.” This produced AI-generated advice purportedly from the perspective of a bunch of famous authors, a bunch of less-famous working journalists (including myself, per The Verge’s reporting), and a bunch of academics (including some who had recently died).

  • Kichae@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    7 hours ago

    AI is always great at things I don’t know how to do, and right about things I don’t know about, but bad at the things I know how to do (often in ways that are subtle but ultimately catastrophic), and wrong about the things I know about (often in ways that are sneaky or nuanced, but which lead to gross misunderstandings).

    Not sure how they managed to tune it to me, *n particular, so precisely, but those geniuses working on it sure do know their stuff!

    /s

    • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 hours ago

      What a completely accurate description. The nuance of the issues being subtle yet catastrophic is always the part that I find the funniest, because how are they so incapable of seeing how that might be a universal issue? Thank you for the chuckle.