And i don’t mean stuff like deepfakes/sora/palantir/anything like that, im talking about why the anti-genai crowd isn’t providing an alternative where you can get instant feedback when you’re journaling
And i don’t mean stuff like deepfakes/sora/palantir/anything like that, im talking about why the anti-genai crowd isn’t providing an alternative where you can get instant feedback when you’re journaling
That’s still feedback.
Feedback can be based on very simple rules and still be feedback. Or in case of LLMs piles of statistics.
I don’t see that as feedback but it depends on your definition of feedback. Just having something come out of the AI is not feedback to me.
A writer writes something. An AUDIENCE provides feedback on their writing. An AI can be processing the writing but can’t be an audience because it is just a tool. Just because the AI returned some text back won’t change that fact regardless of the content of the text.
Data is feedback for example. If you change something on a web page and notice a huge drop in visits then that provides actionable information, i.e. feedback. The visitors didn’t vocalize it, you only see it as numbers on a spreadsheet.
True but OP isn’t using AI to collate or analyse data of the visitors to his website.
As I said, it’s how you use the tool. Every usecase is not valid. In a LOT of cases AI is not useful or efficient and it’s sometimes doing more harm than good.
A recipient responds. If you consider the response to adapt your work (current or future), that’s feedback.
Not to me. As I said, my definition of feedback is a lot tighter.