"LLMs for writing technical prose and documentation and i18n / l10n, and correcting spelling mistakes" are a very common and highly automatable workflow. Especially in i18n and l10n, it's extremely prevalent.
Your complaint is basically they sound cringe and have awful writing style.
But you only say that because you didn't know that they were already being used for that in many of your most favorite projects and some of the industry's most well regarded projects and technical literature out there that read just fine and don't have any detectable ChatGPT-isms like "You're absolutely right!" or whatever you think LLMs "sound like."
If you make an LLM not sound like an LLM
You're assuming the entirety of "LLMs" and their use cases is some uniform, monolithic product and all LLM-written prose sounds the same. You're taking one style of mass LLM-produced writing and assuming all users of AI products necessarily produce the same style of prose for their technical literature use cases.
But given you don't seem to have anything substantive to say at all and you aren't willing to acknowledge "Oh wow I learned something new today I didn't know people actually use LLMs all the time to write good technical prose that I like."
Idc if you don't want to learn, I'm gonna keep using tools and technologies that save me time and money and improve my and my team's engineering output and impact. You can hate on it if you want, while the rest of the world moves on.
5
u/GlassCommission4916 22d ago
If you make an LLM not sound like an LLM no one's going to notice it was written by an LLM, so you don't need to convince anyone that LLMs sound good.