Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Your Favourite John's avatar

You've pretty well nailed my thoughts around AI, particularly spell checkers, better than I could manage. Apart from the structural errors, AI cannot think critically, and as such, will never offer the quality or depth of critical feedback a human editor can.

So, I'll stick with my small grammatical errors for now, and when the time's right, engage with a fellow human to help me polish my craft.

Expand full comment
J D Lear's avatar

Human editors will always be far superior to a computer because they understand the importance of what's not said.

However the reason spelling and grammar checkers are bad is because they are using old versions of AI. There were a number of occasions where Grammarly would suggest something and I didn't understand why, so I pasted that sentence or paragraph into, say, chatgpt (I've played around with a few different ones), explain what Grammarly wanted and why I was confused. Chat was able to succinctly explain why Grammarly was wrong, what it was about my sentence that flagged it in the first place, and if what I originally wrote was wrong in some way, it would then ask me if I wanted it to rewrite it (99/100 times there was no need because I understood enough from the explanation to fix it myself).

Despite this skill, should it replace a human editor? Abso-fucking-lutely not! It doesn't understand voice, it gets confused when looking at more than a chapter at a time, it forgets plot holes, and, as I said earlier, it doesn't understand the value in not stating something. But it's a better tool than a grammar checker like Grammarly and pro writing aid to go over your work with specific issues in mind before sending it to a human.

Thank you for coming to my ted talk lol, sorry that got long.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?