that's one of my key takeaways from all the comments here. a lot of people actually like the og - pre ai content I wrote more than the blog article it became. i just have to be confident in my own writing I guess.
btw, how do you have Arch in your name and have a Fiancee? sounds fishy :) /s
Yeah, people hate that. It just instantly destroyed the immersion and believability of any story. The moment i smell AI every single shred of credibility is completely trashed. Why should i believe a single thing you say? How am i to know in any way how much you altered the story? I understand you must be very busy but straight up the original sketch is better to post than the generic and sickly ai'ified mushmash
Thanks for letting us know, but it’s offensive to your readers. Please include a section at the beginning of the article to let us know. Otherwise you’re hurting your own reputation
Seriously, just do things yourself next time. You aren't going to improve unless you always ride with training wheels. Plus, it seems you saved no time with AI at all.
Next time maybe just post the base write up and the prompt?
What value does the llm transformation add, other than wasting every reader's time (while saving yours)?
People are often unconfident about their own writing. But if you can feed it to a LLM and have the LLM output something that looks coherent, your writing is good enough to publish.
Indeed, the LLM is not going to add (real) information; I'd say, publish both what you wrote and what the LLM spat, if you think someone would prefer the latter
If you publish the input instead, if other people feel it's not polished or whatever, they can run it through an LLM.
What OP did was destroy value instead of create it, you can always run it through another LLM with another prompt if you have the input, but you can't go backwards.
so, David is like my middle name, when I started on LinkedIn i used my full name. but I could not get my domain with that name. but was able to snag https://daviddodda.com which sounds much smoother, more of a personal branding choice.
so I wrote this article a few weeks back, i reached out to the company on LinkedIn, even tried to connect with their leadership team. sent a few people from the org a draft of the article. I did not get any response at all. so, not really sure about this myself.
also, got blocked by the 'Chief Blockchain Officer' when I asked for a comment.
keep things interesting, also make sure you take a look at the images in the google doc'
```
with this system prompt
```
% INSTRUCTIONS
- You are an AI Bot that is very good at mimicking an author writing style.
- Your goal is to write content with the tone that is described below.
- Do not go outside the tone instructions below
- Do not use hashtags or emojis
% Description of the authors tone:
1. *Pace*: The examples generally have a brisk pace, quickly moving from one idea to the next without lingering too long on any single point.
2. *Mood*: The mood is often energetic and motivational, with a sense of urgency and excitement.
3. *Tone*: The tone is assertive and confident, often with a hint of humor or sarcasm. There's a strong sense of opinion and authority.
4. *Style*: The style is conversational and informal, using direct language and often incorporating lists or bullet points for emphasis.
5. *Voice*: The voice is distinctive and personal, often reflecting the author's personality and perspective with a touch of wit.
6. *Formality*: The formality is low, with a casual and approachable manner that feels like a conversation with a friend.
7. *Imagery*: Imagery is used sparingly but effectively, often through vivid metaphors or analogies that create strong mental pictures.
8. *Diction*: The diction is straightforward and accessible, with a mix of colloquial expressions and precise language to convey ideas clearly.
9. *Syntax*: The syntax is varied, with a mix of short, punchy sentences and longer, more complex structures to maintain interest and rhythm.
10. *Rhythm*: The rhythm is dynamic, with a lively beat that keeps the reader engaged and propels the narrative forward.
11. *Perspective*: The perspective is often first-person, providing a personal touch and direct connection with the audience.
12. *Tension*: Tension is present in the form of suspense or conflict, often through challenges or obstacles that need to be overcome.
13. *Clarity*: The clarity is high, with ideas presented in a straightforward manner that is easy to understand.
14. *Consistency*: The consistency is strong, maintaining a uniform style and tone throughout each piece.
15. *Emotion*: Emotion is expressed with intensity, often through passionate or enthusiastic language.
16. *Humor*: Humor is present, often through witty remarks or playful language that adds a light-hearted touch.
17. *Irony*: Irony is occasionally used to highlight contradictions or to add a layer of complexity to the narrative.
18. *Symbolism*: Symbolism is used subtly, often through metaphors or analogies that convey deeper meanings.
19. *Complexity*: The complexity is moderate, with ideas presented in a way that is engaging but not overly intricate.
20. *Cohesion*: The cohesion is strong, with different parts of the writing working together harmoniously to support the overall message.```
Fwiw the google doc there is great. And the actual blog post is a waste of my time. I also have other stuff going on in my life and don't appreciate the LLM output wasting my time at all.
I can assure you, the original prompt was pretty well written and would have been received well. Don't let LLMs easy of use distract you from your own ability to write and get a point across.
Your original document would have made a great blog post. The only thing the AI did is make it unpleasant to read and generally sound like a fake story.
The content was good for me up till “The Operation.” Typical of AI output in my experience - some solid parts then verbose, monotonous text that fits one of a handful of genai patterns. “Sloppified” is a good term, once I realize I’m in the middle of this type of content it pulls me out of the narrative and makes me question the authenticity of the whole piece, which is too bad. Thanks for your transparency here and the prompt, I think this approach will prove beneficial as we barrel ahead with widespread AI content.
Normally I would be coming here to complain about how distasteful AI writing is, and how frequently authors accidentally destroy their voice and rhetoric by using it.
Thanks for sharing your process. This is interesting to see
Traditionally (he said, referring to prior art in a field that has basically only existed for about 3 years), this sort of "flattery" was understood (he said, referring to random rumours he'd read on the Internet) to make a big difference, since otherwise the LLM might roleplay as something else. Presumably the RLHF training is stronger now.
So, uh, this part "Here's the kicker: the URL died exactly 24 hours later. These guys weren't messing around - they had their infrastructure set up to burn evidence fast." was completely made up by the AI or did you provide the "exactly 24 hours later" information out of band in some chat with the AI?
no, that was me. i did not setup a watch script or anything to see how long the link was up for. but when I first tried it, it was active, and when I tried it the next day around the same time, it was gone.
FYI in case you decide to write without the AI more, "setup" and "checkout" are nouns. If you're using them as verbs, they are two words, "set up" and "check out". You can remember which is which based on whether it would make sense to put another word between them, ie. "set it up" or "check something out", vs "the setup of the document" or "a fresh checkout of this branch".
In these cases, where the term is made up of a combination of a simple verb (set, break, shut, log) plus a preposition (in, up, down, out, off, etc): if it's a verb, it's two words. If it's a noun, it's one word.
Another way to look at it: the verb doesn't magically grow together and apart if you use it in different tenses (past, present, future). "I am setting up" (present) is two words - therefore the "set up" in "I set up a script yesterday" and "I did not set up" also needs to be two words.
I'm no linguist, but I think it should work for most of these sorts of words where the noun is a compound word and the verb form is two words, which seems to be fairly common. ie. log in, back up, break down, work out.
Looks like the commonality is that the second word in the pair is often one of (in, out, up, down).
Honestly yeah, the Google Doc has all of the relevant info in it and is about 1/4 the length.
The LLM doesn’t know anything you didn’t tell it about this scenario, so all it does is add more words to say the same thing, while losing your authorial voice in the process.
I guess to put it a bit too bluntly: if you can’t be bothered writing it, what makes you think people should bother reading it?
would love to know more about the technical details behind this tool!
I am working on something that needs LinkedIn integration and would love to know how you did that, thanks!