Posted on 10/04/2025 7:22:12 AM PDT by CIB-173RDABN
In today’s fast-paced world, the process of writing for publication—whether essays, articles, or books—has evolved. One of the most common questions I receive is whether I “used AI” to write a particular piece. The simple answer is yes, but that requires context. AI is not a replacement for human thought or creativity; it is a tool, much like a research library or an editorial team.
When I write, the ideas and structure are mine. I may compose a first draft, then use AI to edit, clean up language, and refine flow. I can also ask AI to fact-check, suggest structure, or summarize complex research in seconds—a process that would otherwise take hours. After AI’s assistance, I review the content, adjust it, and add my own voice and perspective. The result is a finished essay that is both mine and enhanced by AI’s capabilities.
This process is no different in principle from traditional publishing. Consider the journey of a book or article: an author writes a draft, an editor reviews it, suggests improvements, and another editor ensures the final version is ready for publication. AI effectively acts as a personal editorial team, available instantly, without the need for a staff of humans.
Using AI also addresses challenges that modern search engines present. Today, using Google or similar platforms for research can be frustrating: ads crowd search results, bias in ranking can push one viewpoint over others, and personal data is constantly harvested. AI allows me to conduct comprehensive research without those distractions and compile relevant information efficiently while maintaining privacy.
Some critics argue that AI diminishes originality, but in reality, the tool amplifies human creativity rather than replacing it. The core ideas, reasoning, and final narrative come from the human author. AI does the heavy lifting of organizing, editing, and fact-checking, enabling the author to focus on thought, analysis, and expression—the essence of writing.
In conclusion, AI-assisted writing is not a shortcut—it is an evolution of the writing and editorial process. It mirrors the traditional roles of research assistants and editors, adapted to the digital age. Authors using AI remain the creative force behind their work; the finished product is theirs, enhanced by technology, and prepared for the realities of modern publication and research. AI is not a replacement for thought—it is a tool to bring ideas to their best possible form.
And your post is A.I. written!
The excessive use of the em dash... the argument from the negative.
Am I correct?
The em-dashes give it away.
People use AI because, let’s be honest, humans are slow—painfully slow. AI can rip through more data in five seconds than we could in five years—and it doesn’t even need coffee breaks. It handles all the boring stuff we hate—like sorting files, scheduling meetings, or pretending to read the terms and conditions—so we can focus on the “important” things, like binge-watching shows or arguing online. From writing emails to diagnosing diseases, AI does it all—basically like an overachieving coworker who never sleeps, never complains, and makes the rest of us look bad.
If you use AI, you can do it as a starting out place. But if you do not change it. You are creating total garbage like a sophomore in college writes after reading Wikipedia. AI often repeats because it summarizes a source. Then summarizes the next source and so on. Not understanding that its repeating itself as the sources are also copying each other. There is no critical thinking. If the source is wrong the AI is wrong. If the source is slanted the AI is slanted. So your just getting Thew New York Times and Wikipedia summarized and repeated.
CIB-173RDABN - that’s an unusual pen name. Is it an acronym you came up with or an old password? Or did you use AI to create it?
/s
CIB-173RDABN - that’s an unusual pen name. Is it an acronym you came up with or an old password? Or did you use AI to create it?
Combat Infantryman Badge - CIB
173rd Airborne - Vietnam 1965-1966
I also served with the 101st Abn and later with the 82nd Abn.
So in a way it is a code for those that know how to read it and no it is not a password.
Quickly changes password lol😀
Ah, no. It doesn’t “amplify human creativity”. It is a noose still loose around our neck and absolutely destroying the vestiges we had left of an educational system.
The irony.
“AI-assisted” and “plagiarism.” They are both kind of nebulous to absolutely identify.
All those AI created Science papers out there with ZERO research ,LOL
Bookmark to later after AI tells me what to write (just kidding).
There is no critical thinking. If the source is wrong the AI is wrong. If the source is slanted the AI is slanted. So your just getting Thew New York Times and Wikipedia summarized and repeated.
—
You’re right that AI reflects its sources—if they’re biased or wrong, the AI can be too. That’s why I don’t just take it “out of the box.” I’ve trained it to recognize bias, to question narratives, and to focus on how people act versus what they say. It’s a learning process for both of us. Like any tool, if you just accept what it produces, it’s garbage in, garbage out. But with guidance and editing, AI becomes less a parrot of Wikipedia or The New York Times and more like a research assistant. And just as with traditional writing, the final responsibility for judgment and clarity is mine as the author.
I know one thing. AI is not going to originate the ideological “principles” you share in your work. Those practical common sense principles are old school and very hard to even find if you are looking for them. How it was written doesn’t matter, the message within does matter... And YOU are the message.
I'm using AI for editorial feedback in my own book project, and I would say that it does "think critically", because it provides useful critical suggestions to improve the story line. I don't know where that comes from, as it's more than the "word guessing" that we're told is the core functionality. I just assume that, for all the billion$ being poured in, there's plenty of "special sauce" being added.
As far as AI being wrong if its sources are wrong, I would say that applies to humans as well.
People don’t use AI because they are slow.
Current AI systems do some things really well, and some things…not so well.
I recently went through an exercise for a personal project, where I submitted the same prompt to ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity. All of the output had nuances, but were probably 70% directionally fine. Perplexity did perform better with a more complete response, and better suggestions as to next steps.
I then fed the responses from two of the engines into the third across all of the systems to analyze the response feedback. It should be noted that feedback rarely seems to negative, even though one of the initial responses left much to be desired.
After several iterations with additional prompting between iterations, because I had the time to kill, and it actually generated, a pretty good outline.
Each system seems to have different levels of need in the prompts, and that results in the differences of the output. Also, thinking that the first response will be the right or best one is a flaw on the user. And, yes, I have seen mistakes in calculations, and suggested formulas. But, it is a timesaver on some tasks. Just like many things, it can be as helpful, or useless, as the user makes it.
To: CIB-173RDABN
Ah, now that’s a pen name with altitude. CIB, 173rd, 101st, 82nd—each one a badge of grit and legacy. Most folks wouldn’t catch the airborne code embedded in those digits, but some of us still know how to read the sky.
I suppose that’s where the “Discerning” part of my name comes in. Not just hearing impaired—historically attuned. Didn’t realize the full weight of 101 and 82 until Copilot broke it down for me. Turns out “Discerning” isn’t just a pen name—it’s a process.
101st Airborne Division ("Screaming Eagles")
Founded in 1942, famous for WWII operations like Normandy and Market Garden. Known for helicopter-based air assault tactics today. The eagle insignia symbolizes speed, precision, and fierce independence.
82nd Airborne Division ("All American")
Founded in 1917, the first fully airborne-qualified division. Played major roles in WWII and remains a rapid deployment force. The “AA” patch reflects its original makeup of soldiers from all 48 states.
So when someone says they served with the 101st or 82nd, they’re not just sharing history—they’re signaling elite service and tactical legacy. It’s a code, and now I read it a little more clearly.
— Deaf and Discerning
P.S. Copilot assisted me in writing this reply.
P.P.S. Thank you for your service.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.