Teachers frequently use the term "soulless" when evaluating AI essays submitted as if they were human-made.
Do we want soulless software? Maybe we do. Idk..
Discussion
Sounds like AI essays would make good politicians.
I've figured that AI is a game of the best prompt wins. It's dipping inside the minds of the best of what we've already achieved and publicly available.
if we're using soul to mean "human essence " then yes it is by definition. I suspect there will be many flavors of intelligence with different styles. if biological has an edge on style instead of cold and calculating, then that's our niche
But which one is more productive?
I guess it depends on how you define productive. Clearly the study has the premise that writing is a skill set that is worth developing... And if that is true, then yes, LLM is making us worse at that.
But is it true, though..
The jungle spirit called it boring, and i agree. Functional still perhaps, but boring.
nostr:naddr1qqgxxwrx89snsdfev43nswrxxpsnvqgwwaehxw309ahx7uewd3hkctczyp02geyqgka3lu3zv4wa6dhxmnkacs6epsnqjrzgd0hn3m69pkjm6qcyqqq823cf90k85
Is it "soulless", or does it possess you once it's downloaded?
The only soul software needs is a hidden konami code
They have no way to know which essays are AI or not? I think the bigger issue is arbitrary citation or grading criteria that discourage original thought. I've found it much easier to write what teachers want to hear rather than the truth because it gets me the random cert needed to progress in my first job.