I am cancelling my Claude max 5x subscription and moving to ChatGPT pro. I have difficulty enough trying to ensure my meaning comes through correctly, along with everything else; to now have to look out for/analyse watermarks too?
I feel shamed enough by society, thanks Anthropic.
Paradoxically, one of those two firms puts considerably more effort into accommodating such differences, and the other has signed the same EU law and just hasn't performed as well rolling it out.
Both points suggest your subscription support was well chosen before.
How exactly does this impact proofreading? You can manually apply the suggestions (typo here, unnatural sounding sentence there, etc.) the LLM gives you to your own content, and it would stay watermark-free.
Unless with "proofreading" you actually mean having the LLM write your content for you.
I'm not saying you're wrong, much like a gun really would help a victim of CPTSD feel safe.
What I was trying to point to was that "this thing helps some people" does not equal "this thing is unequivocally Good and should be entirely unchecked".
I don't even care about the AI. I just get peeved by bad lines of argumentation.
In the literal sense that a gun is not a chatbot? True.
In the sense that both your post and my analogy use the argument "this is assistive technology" to defend something which only in a very narrow slice of their thing-ness actually is assistive and in the whole rest of usages are much more, and not only Good, which both you and my "futurama caricature" were willfully ignoring? I think it's quite illustrative.
