Well
@dboing you text for so long that asked LLM to summarize :
Sent by Copilot:
Sure, here’s a summary in bullet points:
Cheating in Chess:
Sustainable cheating to appear as a human player with a normal rating trajectory and human-like fluctuations.
Ultimate goal: to invoke or evoke the appearance of a genuine player.
Question: How good would a player be without engines, given current chess engines’ abilities to play at human level?
Linguistic Helpers:
Different tools for language correction and enhancement.
Use of tools like Language Tools and MS Editor for correcting and rephrasing text.
Extensions of correctors help after initial thoughts are written.
Whole-scale paragraph rephrasing tools may not always capture unconventional or complex thoughts accurately.
Potential issue: rephrasing tools might average out unique insights into more conventional language.
Honor Code for Language Tools:
Suggestion for an honor code in language tools.
Transparency in showing the prompt or method used for generating text.
Importance of maintaining the integrity of original thoughts, especially when publishing online
it did not too much sorter but it works other way as well you can give list of your ideas and ask concise paragrah for it lets try
With prompt:
write short non verbose essay on use LLM for forum text using following points:
it is ok use LLM to proof read
is acceptable to ask LLM to write short decritption idead writer provides
it not acceptable to give broad description of idead being discussed and copy paste the output
I would have written shorter but still it is what I wanted to say
--------------------------------
Using Large Language Models (LLMs) for forum text can be beneficial, but it's important to understand the appropriate and ethical ways to utilize them.
Firstly, it is perfectly acceptable to use LLMs for proofreading. These models can efficiently correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation errors, ensuring that the text is clear and professional. This use case enhances the readability and quality of the content without altering the original ideas of the writer.
Secondly, it is also acceptable to ask an LLM to write short descriptions based on ideas provided by the writer. This can help in articulating thoughts more clearly and concisely, especially when the writer has a specific concept in mind but struggles with phrasing. The key here is that the core idea originates from the writer, and the LLM is merely assisting in expression.
However, it is not acceptable to give a broad description of an idea being discussed and then copy-paste the output generated by the LLM. This approach can lead to misrepresentation of the writer's original thoughts and may result in content that lacks authenticity. It also raises ethical concerns about originality and intellectual honesty, as the generated text might not accurately reflect the nuanced understanding or intentions of the writer.
In summary, while LLMs can be valuable tools for enhancing and refining forum text, they should be used responsibly. Proofreading and assisting with short descriptions are appropriate uses, but relying on them to generate entire sections of text from broad prompts undermines the authenticity and originality of the content.
