People reach for all sorts of ratio phors to explain their relationship with AI. For some, AI is almost like a reliable intern. For others, it's a virtual assistant. Chatbots like ChatGpt have moved into the role of companions, therapists and even romantic partners. As a university writing professor, I began to consider AI as a collaborator. However, as a calm alcoholic myself, I can't help but imagine it as a highly functional drunk.
I can talk about how AI has gone through when I need it. Save time by performing mundane tasks, proofreading writing, and having conversations about the obsessions of the latest research. But when it's a hilarious tone, it doesn't seem to understand what I'm saying, but when I keep talking rather than admitting that it's wrong, there are other times when it's either it's wrong or it doesn't have an answer. When I asked ChatGpt to turn written statements from the Academic Conference into a slide deck, as a few weeks ago. My lecture was about literary journalism and proudly provided a presentation about my luxurious trip to Brazil.
Such off-railroad incidents give me many cautionary substances to share with my students. But even when I think about AI Below some of the most important human reasons to writenot all types of sentences are the same. To write, you need to research first. After you create your draft, you need important feedback. Instead of taking a reactionary approach to AI, I would like to explore how it can be a useful collaborator in the process.
Archives and Chats
Much of the university's writing is based on research and reading. This is the process of training your mind to organize and think logically about information. However, using new technology in the process does not mean that we are not doing any important mental work yet. In my lifetime, these technologies have changed radically. I have migrated from the Library Card Catalog and Microfish to online databases such as JSTOR and Google Scholar. These tools don't require much thought. They simply speed up some of the information and collect information, expanding the amount of knowledge that can be considered.
Even before AI, we witnessed this rapid digitalization of this research and writing tool, so we tend to imagine how AI will become a collaborative research partner. In my field, literary scholars, for example, spend time examining key sources in libraries and archives. With digitalization, these are already accessible and AI could make analytics easier.
Recently, we don't look at the archives; conversation In one. Before diving into more intensive tasks, you can have a research-oriented chat with the “mind” who at least have a general idea about what's out there. A few weeks ago I asked if I thought this idea of chatting with archives was a reasonable way to understand what is going on when talking to AI, using limited access to CHATGPT's Advanced Voice function. “When you're talking to AI like me, you're accessing a huge amount of information and patterns that derive from human knowledge to certain points,” and hedged a bit. “It's important to remember that while you can provide information and insights based on that knowledge, you don't have human experience or awareness. So, while you may feel like you're talking to a huge reservoir of knowledge, it's always good to consider the human perspective and context.”
Still, our conversation continued and my questions were pointed out more, so I was able to ask to provide a reference and a place where I could read it further and do it. Since that first tentative conversation, this pre-writing conversation with AI has become part of my workflow. I've always thought it would be easier to solve my ideas through dialogue, but not many people are interested in listening to my half-hearted ideas. That's why it turns out that speaking through ideas is one of the best uses of AI for writers.
Create your own mini archive
Talking to AI has proven to help generate ideas – and the fact that it maintains the transcript makes it easier to refer to later. At the end of last fall semester, a student sent me an email asking if he had heard of Google. Notebooklm. I didn't, but when I opened the link I got the concept almost immediately. Notebooklm takes the idea of consulting with the archives and the next level. Chatting archives are what you assemble yourself with the source of a particular project.
Massible Trends Report
I prepared for a lecture at a recent conference and discarded 25 PDFs I had assembled and stored Zoteromy favorite quote manager, on the interface of Notebooklm. They quickly “read,” and “these sources focus primarily on the works of Wittgenstein, Austin and Cabel, and their relationship with other philosophical and literary movements, such as pragmatism, transcendence, and destruction.” Below the summary, there is a text entry field that encourages “to commence typing,” and “How does ordinary linguistic philosophy challenge traditional philosophical approaches to meaning?”
You are invited to create an audio overview in an area called “Studio” on the right side of the page. This takes the form of a podcast and completes two voices: one man and one woman. Using interactive mode, you will be treated like a caller in old late-night radio shows. I praise my great questions and answers based on the documentation I provided. The podcast section isn't big yet. It's a creepy pandaring, but I can imagine it getting better and more useful. NoteBookLM has other useful features. Create Mind Maps, study guides, briefing documents, FAQs, and timelines. I will continue to use it and suggest that students do that too.
Combined with Mashable's award-winning staff, we meet industry creators, contributors and thought leaders who publish first-person commentary from their living experiences.
A totally author's tutor
Another way that AI can prove useful to student writers is the ability to provide immediate feedback on student writing. When I asked ChatGpt about this concept, I encouraged them to “think about AI like a writing tutor, available 24/7.”
I pasted it into my entire text Previous Massible Story And I sought a proposal. He appeared to be familiar with what he called a “complimentary sandwich” during his classroom peer workshop session. The criticism folds between two compliments.
“This is a compelling, eloquent piece of work… your voice is authentic and reflexive.” Again, it started with “strengths to maintain,” followed by “improvements for improvement,” including “tightening the opening,” “enhancing transitions,” and “considering stronger conclusions.” There were also some “minor style editing” that I should propose. Finally, we provided an overall rating: 9/10.
Maybe it was all a compliment, but I became greedy. I pasted it into another essay (9.5/10) and then talked about the meeting I was working on. The overall impression is, “Your paper presents a compelling argument for the value of literary journalism, focusing on “normal” and “quotidian.” “That's true, but I've never used the word “quotidian.” But then – I had to expect – it came off the rails. “References to basic figures (Bateson, Becker, Carrie, Gertz, Touchman, etc.) and modern examples (e.g., Kiese Raymond, Eliza Griswold, E. None of these numbers mention fundamental or otherwise.
I called attention to this and thanked me for saying it was “absolutely right” and pointing it out. But that explanation was still confusing: “I am falsely based on some of my answers about assumptions and cached ideas from other academic discussions of literary journalism, not your particular paper.” I am studying literary journalism. The names that ChatGpt dropped are from writers, but they are not scholars in my field. Still, after the correction, we got back on track, provided feedback and again took advantage of the complimentary sandwich.
In contrast to academics, I don't know what to do with the fact that ChatGpt is far better for my more journalistic writing.
Ultimately, I like the familiarity with the concept of AI, although it is sometimes over-inducing, and leads it to a very flat and complete lie. I can draw the concept, especially with tools like notebook lum, where writers can approximate things like talking to many human knowledge when talking to chatbots, using tools like notebook lums that allow writers to “teach” AI on topics before discussing it.
AI as a collaborator appeals to me whether I have to approach it with a healthy sense of skepticism or I am always ready to disappoint me.
topic
artificial intelligence
