I just quit my job as a content creator today as my employer decided ChatGPT will do the writing and I was to just do things like inserting links and uploading the text. At a very reduced rate, needless to say. As you say, AI-generated texts do need some editing, but my employer didn't see it this way. I suspect many will see it the same way. At least, short term. At some point, they may start realizing such content does not speak to the reader and does little to convince people to buy whatever the text is promoting. I (like to) believe that real content written by real people will again become valuable. Or they may not.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
For sites that exist to generate content for the sake of content as a vehicle to sell ads, I can see that becoming more prevalent. Real creative or technical writing and journalism will still need a human for the foreseeable future, and businesses jumping on the AI bandwagon will probably eventually realize bland nothingness doesn't really attract readership. I hope we see a wave of such early adopters of AI crashing and burning after a couple quarters.
It's sad that your employer thinks that, because as you say there's a heart in content creation that's very hard for a machine to replicate (not impossible, though, I've seen a lot of heart in AI images but it actually comes from the original the machine replicated.)
As of now, AI is
onlymostly useful to expand on what you already know. If you're looking for an easy way to generate articles using AI, you're doing it backward.Some website owners don't want readers, though. They only want people to view pages and click the ads.
!PIZZA !LUV
@ladyrebecca, @ahmadmanga(2/10) sent you LUV. | tools | discord | community |
HiveWiki | 
NFT | <>< daily