In this issue: Elitist panic over amateur writers. 93 AI journalism initiatives mapped out. The BBC goes all-in on generative AI. Model mayhem at OpenAI. And Hugging Face’s Florent Daudens on Software 3.0 and why we’re all becoming coders just by talking to machines.
What we’re talking about: The Washington Post wants to help readers write opinion pieces. A tool called Ember could guide the writing process, pointing out weak arguments or suggesting better structure. To me, it sounds like saying “democratizing voices” while whispering “we need cheap content”, but that’s beside the point.
Because it’s AI-assisted, we get elitist panic. “Will The Washington Post Embrace the AI Slush Pile?” asks Amanda Katz in The Atlantic. Her argument: Most opinions aren’t interesting, and AI can’t fix that—it only produces “the kind of writing I have spent my whole career trying to hold back.” At this point, you wonder who she dislikes more: AI, readers, or herself.
Even progressive tech publication The Verge puts “amateur writers” in its headline, as if helping people who aren’t professional opinion-havers structure their thoughts is somehow scandalous.
But more voices, better tools to express them? That doesn’t sound like a crisis to me. It might just be an interesting use case for AI.
(Funny enough, at the same time, professional journalists are seeking help from an app called Sophiana by journalist and newsfluencer Sophia Smith Galer to repackage their texts for vertical video.)
More on AI and writing: “AI is better than most humans at producing prose. In a couple years, it will be better than most ‘professional writers’ as well.” This is the first of 23 observations from Jasmine Sun, a writer and former product manager in San Francisco who’s researching AI.
Two more: “AI hallucinates, humans misremember. Yet neuroscience suggests that memory and imagination are one and the same. As Demis Hassabis’ PhD thesis found, amnesiacs make shoddy novelists.” And: “ChatGPT catches me in a lie approximately as often as I catch it.” The observations layer nicely, with a provocation or two thrown in. I really liked it.
Previously, I recommended an article arguing that the meaning of a piece of writing doesn’t depend on the identity of the author, and LLMs expose how the authority of the author was always a fiction. Another article concluded that readers now see text as fungible.
What else I’ve been reading: