Honestly, I was excited for this article and was considering subscribing for the extra parts, but it’s very clearly entirely or mostly written by AI and left at that. I don’t have a problem with you scaling your writing, I just can’t stomach AI prose. It’s infuriating to read and frankly doesn’t have good structure. I know you can do so much better using your own voice and look forward to that. I hope you re-write this piece.
Follow up: just finished editing the article and upcoming 3 article series. I'd appreciate if you let me know if you see any improvement :).
And thanks again for the feedback, super valuable! (I also understand if you prefer to stop reading and do appreciate you acknowledging the need of scaling the writing with a full time job!)
I also want to say that the first edition is "simple" and maybe that's why it came off at full AI? (not saying i don't use it)
Oh wow, thanks for taking the time! Again I’m going to be respectfully honest: It reads more or less the same to me but maybe that’s because I don’t have the prior version to compare anymore.
Here are several very AI-like statements:
“Scope, stated once: this is an educational build.” - this seems like a prompt, oddly
“It is not a benchmark study. Small-scale numbers illustrate mechanisms; for production-scale evidence, the deployment reports cited below are what counts.” - the usual “it’s not this it’s this” thing
“The arc:
Part 1: A two-tower retriever, built honestly” - no one says “built honestly”
“Part 3 of the series also covers the counter-evidence, because it exists” - I’m not sure why we explicitly state that the evidence exists
Maybe I’m just cynical! I read a lot of AI output and it gives me the same feeling. Structurally, there’s no paragraph structure and everything is trying to be too punchy. It feels like every sentence wants to be a topic sentence for the same paragraph. It reads like a draft.
Honestly, I was excited for this article and was considering subscribing for the extra parts, but it’s very clearly entirely or mostly written by AI and left at that. I don’t have a problem with you scaling your writing, I just can’t stomach AI prose. It’s infuriating to read and frankly doesn’t have good structure. I know you can do so much better using your own voice and look forward to that. I hope you re-write this piece.
Follow up: just finished editing the article and upcoming 3 article series. I'd appreciate if you let me know if you see any improvement :).
And thanks again for the feedback, super valuable! (I also understand if you prefer to stop reading and do appreciate you acknowledging the need of scaling the writing with a full time job!)
I also want to say that the first edition is "simple" and maybe that's why it came off at full AI? (not saying i don't use it)
Oh wow, thanks for taking the time! Again I’m going to be respectfully honest: It reads more or less the same to me but maybe that’s because I don’t have the prior version to compare anymore.
Here are several very AI-like statements:
“Scope, stated once: this is an educational build.” - this seems like a prompt, oddly
“It is not a benchmark study. Small-scale numbers illustrate mechanisms; for production-scale evidence, the deployment reports cited below are what counts.” - the usual “it’s not this it’s this” thing
“The arc:
Part 1: A two-tower retriever, built honestly” - no one says “built honestly”
“Part 3 of the series also covers the counter-evidence, because it exists” - I’m not sure why we explicitly state that the evidence exists
Maybe I’m just cynical! I read a lot of AI output and it gives me the same feeling. Structurally, there’s no paragraph structure and everything is trying to be too punchy. It feels like every sentence wants to be a topic sentence for the same paragraph. It reads like a draft.
Thanks for the feedback i have taken it into account for the upcoming parts!