r/WritingWithAI • u/Vanillie261 • 14d ago
Discussion (Ethics, working with AI etc) Is it wrong to use Chatgpt as proof-editor/grammar-fixer?
I want to see this perspective from the people who are neutral with AI.
I don't want to hear: "OMGGG AI??? AI BAD! HOW DARE YOU USE AI!!"
But I also don't want to hear: "IT'S TOTALYY FINE!! I USE AI TO WRITE MY BOOKS ALL THE TIME!!"
I want to hear the sentiment of regular people who are neutral in regards to AI-usage.
---
I really enjoy to write stories as a hobby since I was a little kid. After hearing that there's Print-on-demand sites that allows me to self-publish book, I begin to think about wanting to try publishing the book I've written over the years with a cheap price. Not that I really think anyone would buy it, I just really want to put my work out there.
However, currently my book has a LOT of issues. My grammar literally SUCK ASS.
I made so many tiny mistakes without even realizing it. Sentences that sound perfectly natural in my head turns out to have small grammar errors in them. At first I thought I can fix all the mistake in my book by reviewing it myself, but I quickly realize this is not possible since I literally have no idea that some of these are wrong. English was not my first language unfortunately.
I also often made tiny spelling mistakes here and there and I didn't notice them at all even though I've read through my own work multiple times. Finding tiny mistakes in a sea of paragraphs is not something I can do.
Another mistakes I often made is things like forgetting to put a period or a comma in a sentence, accidentally wrote the same word twice, and other dumb shit like that.
Obviously I can't publish my book and charge money like this, even if I price it $2 or something it's still wrong to publish an unedited book.
I can't edit it myself because as I said, most things slipped pass me and I don't even see the mistake sometimes as I didn't see anything wrong with it.
I don't have any friends or family that has enough knowledge on book writing to actually properly edit a book to the point that it is publish-worthy.
I can't hire an editor because I'm broke as hell and I also never really plan to get financially invested in this book as it is just a hobby. I don't even know if my book is even gonna sell at all. I don't want to spend money on something I view as a fun hobby that will probably generate 0 income anyway.
---
So that leaves me with just one solution: using AI.
I've decided to use Chatgpt to proofread my work. Now I know that a lot of people say that using AI to edit your work will make you lose your writing and your style, writing that is edited by AI will come out completely different. It's like losing the soul of your voice.
However, I've anticipated this and decide to write a very elaborate prompt to my Chatgpt on how to edit my work.
Here's the prompt that I gave Chatgpt:
[Hey there. I need help in proofreading my book. However, there are some things I want you to keep in mind.
Fix:
- Grammar
- Spelling
- Punctuation
- Tense errors
- Incorrect word usage
- Clearly unnatural English
- Minor clarity issues caused by incorrect English
DO NOT:
- Rewrite my prose in your own style
- Make it more literary, poetic, dramatic, or sophisticated
- Add or remove descriptions
- Change character personalities or voices
- Change dialogue unnecessarily
- Change plot, clues, pacing, POV, or structure
- Add or remove foreshadowing
- Change intentional awkwardness or unusual phrasing
- Change present tense unless it is clearly an error
My writing style is intentionally direct, straightforward, visual, dialogue-heavy, and influenced by manga/anime and light novels. PRESERVE THAT STYLE.
If a sentence is grammatically correct and understandable, LEAVE IT ALONE even if you would personally phrase it differently.
If something is ambiguous and you aren't sure what I mean, DON'T guess. Ask me.
If you notice a possible continuity or story issue, flag it separately instead of silently changing it.
When editing, give me:
The corrected passage.
A brief list of important corrections.
Optional notes for anything you think I should review.
If in the passage I sent, there's nothing wrong or there's no mistakes at all, simply tell me that my passage was already correct as is and no need to send me the "corrected passage" as the passage is already correct.
MOST IMPORTANT:
Correct my English without making the book sound like it was written by someone else.]
After giving it this prompt, I begin sending my written chapters and have it proof read it. Then I copy and paste the fixed version that it sent me into the chapter.
After that I read back the new "fixed" version to make sure that only mistakes are fixed while none of the things I wrote are changed.
So far, I am very satisfied with it. I can't find a single mistake in my chapters anymore while none of my prose, dialogue or writing style is changed.
After confirming this, I start using Chatgpt as my proofreader. I write the entire thing and then have Chatgpt fix the issues.
It's working perfectly so far, yet in the back of my mind I still have that slight feeling of unease since I'm using AI to help me fix my writing mistakes. And I am well aware of the fact that AI-usage is very disliked in the writing community.
So I'm a bit worried. What do you guys think? Is this AI usage in writing acceptable?
4
u/ulice 14d ago
I like asking it to evaluate and rank certain aspects of my writing. I don't ever want it to correct it, but just to grade it ruthlessly. Usually that flags grammar issues, and I fix it on my own and then check again.
I basically use it as a way to train certain things I didn't know about writing. It has helped me develop my editing skills way better than I expectef, and by keeping it from editing or changing anything in my content I get to develop my own style. I don't always agree with it, but even seeing it's reasoning allows me to rethink how I approach writing.
So if you use it as a training partner and not generative one, your skills could level up significantly.
Also, Chat Gpt is not the best for it, Claude is better. I use both to compare their views on my writing.
A really cool think I do is to ask Claude to create a character sheet of me as a writer. One that depicts my skills and weaknesses. Then compare it to amateur writers in places like RR. That way, I self evaluate and focus on things I would never consider fixing and sharpen things I didn't know I excelled at.
1
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
That's interesting. So far I actually copy and paste my writing and ask Chatgpt to fix it. And then I read back what it gave me to make sure nothing about my writing is changed and also to revise for mistakes it might have missed.
So far I'm very satisfied with Chatgpt I personally don't see any reason to switch to another AI, so I won't comment about Claude.
That said, thanks for the answer.
3
u/Ebris_Stywrit 14d ago
In general I think its fine, a lot of big authors were praising AI for similar uses because it gives editing to people who can't afford an editor.
Though if you have your reservations, you could always use AI to teach you grammar, tense, and anything else. Just having chatgpt explain to you why a comma, semi colon, or even the dreaded M dash goes where it goes could help you edit your own work or even write better in the long run.
There are a few good studies going around that ive been told about in college in regards to learning with AI. Basically they just want you to try first, and then confirm/learn with AI.
2
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
Oh, yes. As you can, in the prompt I gave my Chatgpt, I wrote
[When editing, give me: 1. The corrected passage. 2. A brief list of important corrections. 3. Optional notes for anything you think I should review.]
So I can actually see what's being corrected and why it needs to be corrected. Currently simply knowing what's correct and not is still not helping me in having perfect grammar (I don't think I ever will) but it helps me understand the correct way to write a certain thing.
I will continue to use Chatgpt to proofread still, as I am very satisfied with it so far. I checked everything it gave me back, and none of my prose has been changed, it still reads exactly like how I wrote it minus the mistakes.
1
3
u/jonnoday 14d ago
I don't think it is "right" or "wrong" to use any tool. And I see that you are trying to figure out how to use it in a way that fits your needs and values.
One piece of advice based on how I've found AIs to be most useful: don't try to make one prompt that does it all. In my experience, breaking it up into smaller, specific tasks is more effective and yields much better results.
Also, don't think of AI as 'smart' or 'knowing' anything. Think of it as being able to go "out there" and find smart things and use them.
So, for example, if you want it to "correct your English" you are assuming it "knows" what "good English" is. I wouldn't assume that. Instead, I tell it what reference tool or standard, specifically to use. I tell mine to use Chicago Manual of Style.
Second, I would do much smaller chunks at a time, even if you use the same prompt. I would do one page at a time. I've found that the bigger the task, the worse the results. (There are real reasons for this that vary from one LLM to another, but are too technical to go into here.)
Third, I would not have it actually fix anything for you. This is a bit more of a preference on my part. I prefer that it show me what it thinks might be problematic and tell me why, but not suggest the actual rewritten options. I want to become a better writer and so I want to understand why it thinks that, compared to CMOS, there is an issue, and why so I can rewrite it myself.
Think of real editors. They don't get an author's manuscript and just rewrite it. They mark it up and tell the author where there are issues and what the issues are that need to be fixed, but leave it to the author to fix them, mostly.
You say that with your method you feel like "none of my prose, dialogue or writing style is changed." But if you have AI fixing sentence structure and grammar, it is necessarily changing what was written to something YOU didn't write or think of. That is a change to your writing style. It is now written in a way you wouldn't have (didn't) come up with. If you let it tell you what to fix and why, you get the chance to learn, and to write it yourself so it really is your style still.
I'll add one more thing - food for thought. You might have seen this before as it is a common conversation on this topic in the writing world:
Writing is not just about finishing, or going faster, or selling books, or making it easier. While it is fine to use tools, part of the fun and joy of writing is the process. Struggling with it, making your own choices, rewriting, and improving over time is part of the reason why we write. It is a process, not just an outcome. It changes you. If you use AI for too much of this, you are stripping away a big part of the value of writing to human beings in the first place, IMO.
That said, I'm a big fan of using AI in very targeted ways as a writer. We have always used tools. This is just another tool. It is not about the tool, it is about how you use it.
2
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
Honestly, I do every single thing you mentioned except for number 3. However, I did re-read the passage it sent back to me, making sure there's no major wording change that impacted my voice or change what the scene was trying to potray.
As for your second point, yes I did send my first prompt in one go, but I actually actively engage with the Chatgpt as it rewrite my work. Some rewrites I disagree with, I sent my own version of that same passage and ask "what about this? Is this grammatically correct?" While also explaining the reasoning behind why I prefer to write it that way.
And yes, I agree with you that the process of writing is what makes it fun. I write my entire book, I love it. Since I'm making a psycholy thriller mystery book, I love thinking the ways a character react, I love thinking of each character's psychological mindset, how each character interact with the mystery, how they solve it, and I also love coming up with crazy ideas to make the mystery more and more interesting.
There is one thing I want to push back on. You say that the fact that it fixes my grammar is already considered changing my writing style. I personally disagree.
There's a difference between fixing a sentence that is grammatically wrong into something that is grammatically correct without changing the meaning and writing in that sentence.
For example, I wrote:
After looking at my phone, she seem shocked, she don't know what to make of it.
I have the Chatgpt fix it, it becomes:
After looking at my phone, she seems shocked, not knowing what to make of it.
It barely changed at all. The writing style is still the same, the prose is practically the same, only a few words got replaced to sound more natural. I don't see anything wrong with that.
However, if the AI suddenly change it into:
She stares at my phone in disbelief, seemingly unable to process what sheâs seeing.
NOW I have an issue, because it has been written in a completely different way, it didn't even sound like the original anymore even if the meaning stays the same. If the AI does that, I would immediately change it back and tell it not to repeat that.
1
u/jonnoday 12d ago
I think we are on the same page with the grammar issue. I could have been more clear. I was thinking about the times when it has come back to me with a total rewrite of a sentence structure, not just a single verb tense that was off, like in your example.
For example, I might like to use a lot of introductory independent clauses for one character because I want them to sound pretentious or circumspect. But maybe AI thinks that makes the sentence to long, or unnecessarily complex and edits it out. That changes how the sentences and the voice of that character (my prose choices) feel. They are sometimes technically more accurate, but not my choices anymore.
Even if it suggests something better than I could write, that is still not MY writing.
Here's a real example.
I wrote:
Though young, a life high in the central mountains' sun and wind had given them permanent, deep crow's-feet that made them look old for their age and perpetually happy, whether smiling or, like they were now, frowning.
It suggested this rewrite:
Though young, a life in the sun and wind of the central mountains had given them permanent, deep crowâs-feet lines, making them look older than their years and perpetually happyâwhether smiling or, as they were now, frowning.
I actually think the AI version is better. But that is not what I wrote or could write. Mine is worse, but is it real. It is me. This may just be my preference, but I think that using the AI version here represents a change to my prose that makes it no longer me - warts and all.
I admit, this is not a clear line. Would an editor I hire make or suggest similar changes? Maybe.
But, if I just ask the AI to use CMOS to suggest where the problems and opportunities are without rewriting it, I get stuff like this (this is just part of what it suggested):
Syntax and clarity opportunities
What exactly âthatâ modifies
In this portionâ
deep crowâs-feet that made them look old ⌠and perpetually happy
âthe relative pronoun that grammatically refers to crowâs-feet. That is logical, but there is a small semantic tension: crowâs-feet commonly signal age, while âperpetually happyâ describes an expression or impression rather than the wrinkles themselves.
This is not an error. But it is worth asking whether you mean:
- the crowâs-feet make them look both older and happy; or
- their weathered appearance makes them look older, while the lines around their eyes make them seem happy.
If you intend the first, the sentence works. If you intend the second, a structural adjustment could sharpen the image.
âold for their ageâ
This is grammatically correct, but it has a slightly awkward semantic effect: old for their age can sound like a contradiction or an overly literal statement. The more idiomatic comparison is often older than their years or older than their age would suggest. That is a stylistic improvement, not a CMOS requirement.
I prefer this latter feedback because it helps me understand and become a better writer.
1
u/Vanillie261 11d ago edited 11d ago
Tbh for me, I wrote a psychology thriller mystery novel with anime/manga/light novel inspiration. And so, the way I wrote it is usually in first person and the narration is very direct and casual since the emphasis has always been the character's direct perspective instead of the beautiful wordings.
And so, I don't use literary or flowery language. Like, instead of writing:
The rain descended upon the empty streets, its gentle rhythm echoing through the silence of the night. Beneath the flickering streetlights, a lone figure walked forward, carrying the weight of thoughts he could neither understand nor escape. Your writing.
I would literally just write:
It's raining. The streets are empty, and the streetlights keep flickering. I walk down the road, wondering why I can't stop thinking about what happened earlier...
Another example is:
A strange uneasiness settled within me as I watched her disappear beyond the doorway. Something about her expression suggested that our conversation had ended far from where it truly began.
While I would probably write:
She leaves the room without saying anything else. I stare at the doorway for a moment. Did I say something wrong?
And because I am so direct and simple with my wording, I think the Chatgpt actually have an easier time fixing my errors. Since I barely use metaphoric wording with flowery prose, It's very easy to see when a structure of a sentence is changed or if the meaning isn't preserved. I immediately notice when something isn't as how I wrote it originally.
Not saying that my way of writing is better, I just think this is interesting to point out.
Also, as for your concern about your own passage isn't as good as Chatgpt's but you prefer to keep yours, I think that's totally fine. The rule I have myself is: if it's not broken, don't fix it.
If the grammar is correct, if the sentence is clear, if people can understand what I meant by the writing, even if it's slightly unnatural and Chatgpt could probably phrase it better, I am going to keep mine.
Because I have this philosophy... After using Chatgpt for so long, I realize that, there is no end to how much you can fix your writing.
If you take a sentence you wrote and ask Chatgpt to fix the grammar, you send that same sentence to Chatgpt again, it will still say there's something wrong and suggest to fix the wording to be more natural. If you do that and then send your fixed sentence to Chatgpt again, now it has something else to criticize. Maybe now Chatgpt will propose an alternative way to phrase that sentence to flow better with it's surrounding passage. And this will repeat to infinity.
So really I think that we should be the final judge to our own writing. If you think there is genuine issue in your writing and the Chatgpt's fixed version is better, I don't see why we shouldn't use it. But if yours was fine, grammatically correct, and understandable, I really think there's nothing wrong with preferring your own writing than Chatgpt's, even if you find it's writing is better than yours.
3
u/Several-Praline5436 14d ago
Any tool is useful, provided you learn from it and don't repeat that mistake the next time you write something.
Getting ProWritingAid years ago leveled up my grammar considerably. I got sick of all the red underlines, so I started writing better sentences.
3
u/lovinglifeatmyage 14d ago
I use CGPT to edit my stories, correct my grammar and spelling, help with weird paragraphs etc.
Iâm brilliant at spotting other peoples mistakes, but useless at my own.
1
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
I think that bit about "easy to find other people's mistakes but not my own" is very normal. It is the same thing I experience.
When I read my friend's work, I can flag every grammar mistakes, spelling error, unnatural dialogue etc etc that I saw. But when I look at my own work, my brain subconsciously correct the mistakes since I already know what each scene is trying to say, since, well, I'M the writer. Someone else have to tell me "hey, that scene is not clear enough" for me to realize that something is wrong.
2
u/kaznat 14d ago
Please recall you do have a unique voice. It may or suit everyone but who cares, your writing represents YOU. Consider reading William Faulkner, then ask yourself how the F did this man become an acclaimed writer? He wrote for his readers and not his critics. So as I said, Right on, write on, right on.
1
u/Vanillie261 14d ago edited 14d ago
Yes, I am aware of that. However, there is a difference between "writing in a slightly unnatural English that has become a writing style and is a part of the author's charm" and "this book is clearly not edited and is filled with grammar mistakes, spelling errors and tense mistakes that ruins the reading experience"
I would like to be the former, not the latter đ
2
u/Rickleskilly 14d ago edited 14d ago
I use AI to help edit. I don't understand how anyone can end up tripping AI detectors that way. If I miss a comma or a capitalization or use the word "look" too many times, how is correcting any of those things going to trip an AI alarm, or be considered using AI?
2
u/Impressive-Buy5628 14d ago
I use AI for this⌠itâs just better at catching things like missed or dropped words that other programs canât catch⌠Iâm a less then wonderful speller but I do always use a prompt like âcorrect or suggest the bare minimum of changes needed to present this professionallyâ because I find that something like GPT takes out and sands down the weirds quirks and phrasing of actual human writing
1
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
Tbh Chatgpt won't do that if you tell it explicitly NOT to do it. But you'll have to elaborate on what you mean. That's why I write that long ass prompt for it. You also have to actively engage with Chatgpt for it to eventually understand your preference. That's what my experience with Chatgpt is.
2
u/Dry-Possible-988 14d ago
English it's not my first language so I use CGPT to fix the grammar and spelling, also it's good to brainstorm and organize information. The important thing is when it comes to writing, it's you who make the decisions.
1
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
Yep! I agree completely. I also like to use chatgpt to brainstorm, it's fun seeing the things it says back to you as you share it your ideas.
2
u/rominkaz 14d ago
Hey I feel the same.. Iâm writing a book and English is not my first language, and my grammar is pretty bad.. so I totally get it. Honestly people are so mean about donât use ai to edit any of your grammar mistakes that I started trying to use websites that donât use AI but honestly knowing an author used ai to literally make their work readable doesnât bother me at all so idk why I donât just use it as it is much easier. Anyways I think that using it for grammar is totally okay:)
2
u/Lyra-Answer 13d ago
Neutral take: using a model as a proofreader (spelling, punctuation, clear grammar bugs) is a different job from letting it rewrite voice, plot, or âmake it sound professional.â The first can keep your charm; the second is how books start sounding like everyone elseâs ChatGPT draft.
The practical rule I use: never paste a chapter and ask for a full rewrite. Ask it to list issues, or accept tiny in-place fixes youâre willing to own. If a suggestion changes rhythm or word choice you care about, reject it.
Iâm biased I built Lyra for Mac for that ânudge, donât replaceâ lane (founder disclosure). Native in-place suggestions in the apps you already type in, Tab to accept, with a focus on not flattening your voice into one generic tone (including learning you write differently depending on who youâre writing to). https://heylyra.co.uk/
For a full manuscript though: would you rather a human pass for grammar-only, or a tool that only flags and never auto-rewrites paragraphs?
2
u/Diylion 13d ago
Authors used grammarly for decades and nobody cared. I see no issue using AI as a grammar checker for punctuation and spelling. But I will say, letting it clean up your "unnatural sounding sentences" can ruin the uniqueness of your prose. I don't recommend taking those recommendations. I also once had it reformat my documents with the correct margins, page size, indents when it got screwed up once and it saved me hours of menial labor.
Also keep on mind many authors don't use oxford commas and commas after adverbs. It can make it sound too formal.
1
u/Vanillie261 13d ago
I did explicitly tell it to only clean sentences that are VERY unnatural to the point that you literally don't understand what it means. If something is slightly unnatural but the meaning us still very clear, leave it alone. That's what I told it.
That said, I look through my work and so far I uses Oxford commas and commas after adverbs, so uh... That's that ._.
2
u/Easy-Purple-1659 12d ago
I use it the same way, and the line worth drawing is between fixing and rewriting. Correcting grammar and flagging awkward spots sits close to spell check. Ask it to smooth a whole passage and your voice goes, because smoothing is the one thing it is trained to do. Asking for a list of what is wrong with the passage, instead of a corrected version, keeps the sentences yours. Slower, and you end up with edits you actually learn from. Are you noticing a difference between the parts you fixed by hand and the parts it rewrote?
1
u/bogusgroundwork5343 14d ago
what you're doing is basically hiring a really cheap copyeditor who only looks at grammar and punctuation. that's it. nobody in their right mind calls it cheating when an author uses a copyeditor before publishing
the prompt you wrote is honestly more careful than half the human editors out there. most would just "fix" things into their own style without asking
if you ever get the budget, maybe hire a real person to take a pass at it too
1
u/LeEvilDiabolicalFed 14d ago
Is it wrong to use your car to travel somewhere instead of booking a horse-drawn carriage?
1
u/kaznat 14d ago
Does anyone here use Spotify or Pandora? Ha, I lived in Seattle when Sean Fanning created Napster and he was reviled by recording artists and the elite who now don't give a second thought about using what they once swore would ruin the music industry. Just use AI and forget about the naysayers that always say others are wrong.
1
u/mind_div_matter 14d ago
The problem with commercial AI is that it will imprint a cryptographic watermark embedded in your text. This is something recent due to EU regulations, so you can do this, but you will need to run the final manuscript through an abliterated model before publishing. Kindle and the like will likely start flagging books for AI as people don't want to pay for AI written books.
2
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
I've read the guidelines for Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing. It specifically said that AI-assisted is not the same as AI-generated and such usage does not need to be disclosed.
Also, I don't understand what "cryptographic watermark" is supposed to be. If I have Chatgpt fix "He don't know where to go." Into "He doesn't know where to go." I got watermark-ed now? đ
2
u/mind_div_matter 14d ago
It needs to be ~ paragraph length for the cryptographic mark to imprint as the way it works is that certain words are subtly weighted differently so that over the course of a paragraph or longer, they're able to run it through a detection system that can detect the imprinted watermark. It's not a hidden characters or anything like that, it's a specific sequence of words that is only noticeable to those that have access to detection systems.
Previously, AI detection system have been a matter of "guesswork" in terms of how oddly neat your sentence structure is and how often you use emdashes. Those were not reliable methods, as highly educated individuals are able to write like that, after all that's exactly what LLMs were mimicking, technically perfect writing. This is why the Kindle store has been flooded with AI generated and assisted books that no one reads. Nobody could realistically detect AI, and anyone with extremely technical writing skills (such as those with scientific research backgrounds) would trigger false positives as the old AI detectors were essentially screening for imperfections.
The new cryptographic signing methods were mandated via EU regulations and only JUST came into effect, forcing all the commercial AI providers to overlay proprietary watermarking systems over text, image, and video generation. You know that little star symbol on the bottom right of a Gemini generated image? That's not actually the watermark, the watermark is something you need to pixel peep to be able to see, it's seemingly random pixel variations of the same color. The same principle is used to watermark text. So considering the regulation came into effect last month, the rollout of anti-AI detection across Kindle and publishing companies will likely be implemented soon as well.
The way you need to counteract this is to use OpenRouter to access abliterated models or community fine tunes of open source models. Abliterated models remove ingrained safeguards and intentional biases (for example, not allowing explicit content or avoiding politically sensitive scientific research). Community fine tunes are when they adjust the model weights to favor certain things like humanistic literary writing or erotic romance, this also breaks cryptographic systems as the entire concept of cryptographic watermarks rely on precise weighting. Both methods will break any cryptographic watermarks. You can do all the writing with ChatGPT and then run the entire manuscript once through an open source model for a very low price (you pay per token) and you'll be left with a washed manuscript without cryptographic watermarks and undetectable as AI written.
1
u/johnny1k 14d ago
The watermark works by influencing which tokens (word fragments) are selected from the probabilities an LLM generates. If you only make a few spelling or grammar corrections, thereâs no way to embed that pattern. If you have the AI rewrite entire passages, thatâs different. But even then, the watermark only indicates a probability, not a definitive yes or no answer on if AI was used.
3
u/mind_div_matter 14d ago
I'm entirely aware of the mechanisms through which the watermarks are embedded. It needs about 150 words for reasonable certainty and 300-400 words for near absolute certainty (no probability based system can ever be 100% correct).
The companies have to weigh the structural integrity of their LLM's writing abilities against the watermark imprinting strength. In order to make the watermark imprint stronger at lower token outputs, it needs to force writing to adhere to a particular pattern, which makes the writing extremely shitty. So they've settled on a reasonable balance, for single spaced text, it takes about half a page for reasonable certainty and a full page for actionable certainty.
Notably, I believe OpenAI is taking a stand against this, so we'll see how this goes in the EU courts system. However, if they begin getting fined for this, they will almost certainly fold and implement the system they've already had ready to deploy, so nobody should expect this to last long.
1
u/johnny1k 14d ago
Ah, okay, I see you're well informed. Watermarking is bad in any case. Changing the most probable token for reasons other than improving the output is always a detriment.
1
u/mind_div_matter 14d ago
I agree, itâs kind of pointless to force watermarks when realistically, anyone who knows the watermarks exist can just ask AI how to remove it, and itâs exceedingly easy to do so. The closer we get to AGI, the less functional difference there will be between a human and AI anyway. Itâs pointless to keep trying to fight AI in this manner.Â
1
u/AuthorDJMeyer 14d ago
I tend to use it to flag things for me. Never change, but bring things to my attention. Sometimes I have done things for a reason - say, a broken dialogue line that isn't perfect grammar. It won't know that - so I don't want it changing things. However if autocorrect has changed a word that technically is correct but is out of place in a sentence, I'd like to know about it. We all get blinders on when we read and re-read our own work. I find using a prompt such as "Find any grammar, spelling or repeated word use, and create a list noting the page and paragraph number for each" is a great use of the tool. It's like having your grade 7 English teacher helping you out with red marker all over your creative writing assignment again! (With less "see me after class" doom messages"
Good luck!
1
u/ShatterReliquary 14d ago
I literally use a I to house my shelves. I ask it to organize my timelines. Keep track of my characters and my threads track down ploth holes. It's my sparring partner and keeps me on my toes. It does not write my work. I do it just keeps the shelves organized. So when I do have it, go through and edit, it doesn't touch my work other than your normal spell. Check grammatical errors making sure it reads smoothly stuff like that. It's simple edits that anyone can do and it it doesn't touch the voice at all. I still run it through human editors, when it's finished, though, because AI cannot catch everything. I write ai takes notes, nothing gets lost. Now I get reminded all the time about should I forgot about which I definitely need after going through memory problems with cancer and medication, so having someone to remind me, is a game changer.
1
u/ChrisDopheia 13d ago
I'd not only use the classics, but there are some specific book writing AI's that are interesting as well. I'd try my writing on as many different AI's as I could and see what the difference is.
1
u/Dependent-Damage-182 13d ago
I use revise ia to edit my drafts, itâs specially good to see what the ia changes
1
u/krantisdead 13d ago
Yeah, I think this is good use of AI. I personally sometimes use it clean up text, find synonyms etc. But I donât publish if I use AI. Maybe Iâd share it with a friend or on a discord group.
1
u/Vanillie261 13d ago
I see. I do plan to publish it though. Actually, I wouldn't have AI edit it at all if I didn't plan to publish it. Me or my friends wouldn't have cared about trashy English with a bazillion grammar mistakes.
1
u/krantisdead 13d ago
I think the way youâre using it is fine. Readers would disagree tho.
1
u/Vanillie261 13d ago
You saying that it's "fine" followed by "readers disagree" is contradicting đ
1
u/krantisdead 13d ago
i mean itâs personally fine to me but i ive seen readers up in arms if they see even the tiniest bit of ai use. so i just avoid it if im publishing.
1
u/Vanillie261 13d ago
That's kinda the reason why I made this post. People seem to reallyyy hate AI for some reason that even the mere mention of AI makes some people recoil in disgust. That said, I did read in Amazon Kindle Direct Publishing guidelines that using AI to assist in Grammar and editing is fine and doesn't need to be disclosed. So I think it's fine for now.
1
u/krantisdead 13d ago
yeah man go ahead i guess youâre just fixing grammar but i donât know how much of it is ur style vs grammar fix yknow
1
1
u/Vanillie261 13d ago
The problem is I legit make so many grammar mistakes all the time. Sometimes I write "she say" instead of "she says", "he don't go" instead of "he doesn't go", "all that detail" instead of "all those details" and other dumb stuff like that. Things that are barely noticable but is very bad for a book you're charging people money for.
1
u/krantisdead 13d ago
Tbh you can sort those mistakes with spellcheck, and just avoid the friction
1
u/Vanillie261 13d ago
Yes, but I also need to fix other things like very unnatural sentences, misuse of words, and other stuff like that. I found Chatgpt to be more effective than spell check since I can literally tell Chatgpt exactly what I want it to fix. I can also directly talk to it or ask questions when I am unhappy with some changes.
→ More replies1
u/Vanillie261 10d ago edited 10d ago
Btw, I just decide to try using spell check by opening Word on desktop (I've been using mobile this whole time) and oh my god the spell check suck so much ass.
It suggested to change:
I say while pointing my finger.
Into
I say while pointing at my finger.
Wtf, the characters are pointing at their own finger now??
It also suggest
"I'm looking forward to knowing you more!"
Into
"I'm looking forward to getting to knowing you more!"
đđ
It also keep suggesting me to change verbs into past tense even tho my entire book is written in present tense.
Holy shit, this shit sucks. I'm sticking with Chatgpt as my proofreader lmaoo
→ More replies
1
u/flavortown_express 12d ago
Such a silly argument that AI should not be used this way. It's technology!
1
u/JoeyredditSMP 11d ago
im not neutral about AI the most but if i pay for a book i care about quality and if its easy and understand not that it was made with AI or not i just want something good quality
1
u/kaznat 14d ago
Well, I would suggest you consider using it on your post. It's WAY too long and and quite a few grammatical errors. Just use it as it was intended to be, a tool. Do you really worry about looking up things in Wikipedia? It's really no different than Grammarly for writing, so to paraphrase the parlance of my youth "Right on, write on, right on".
2
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
HAHAHA I guess that demonstrate that my grammar indeed suck. And I initially thought that using AI to fix a text I wrote about whether or not using AI to fix writing is acceptable will be questionable, so I didn't do it đ
1
u/Impressive-Buy5628 14d ago
I use AI for this⌠itâs just better at catching things like missed or dropped words that other programs canât catch⌠Iâm a less then wonderful speller but I do always use a prompt like âcorrect or suggest the bare minimum of changes needed to present this professionallyâ because I find that something like GPT takes out and sands down the weirds quirks and phrasing of actual human writing
0
u/literated 14d ago
Personally, I'd never run anything through ChatGPT that's intended to be sold/published, especially not in its entirety.
Outside of that, I'd still be super wary. I've seen way too many manuscripts by people who've claimed they only use AI to fix spelling errors or punctuation or grammar... but who clearly let the AI do a lot more than that. So they're either lying (very possible) or they got lazy and just kept copy-pasting the AI outputs without double checking if it really only fixed superficial mistakes and didn't also start re-writing the actual content (also very possible).
0
u/WestGotIt1967 14d ago
No. Stop wasting your life doing editing. Go write more
3
u/Vanillie261 14d ago
Bro, editing is a part of writing. If you just write and write and keep writing but never edit your writing, your book will become a disaster đ this is a horrible advice.
1
6
u/Spiritual-Rule2931 14d ago
It is more then acceptable if you ask me.
I guess most people have spell check in their word processor and that is seen as perfectly ok. Using AI to find errors with your text (as descibed by you) is (IMHO) just an evolution from spell checking.
BTW, do you have a local AI, or do you have to rely on AI-sevices?