Exactly. LLM's assisting people in writing soul-sucking corporate drivel is a good thing, I hope this changes the public perception on the umbrella of 'formal office writing'. (including: internal emails, job applications etc.) So much time-wasting bullshit to form nothing productive.

Job postings are wild. Like, "Java Spring Boot developer with 8+ years experience" would be fine 90% of the time.

I'm not aware of any paper about this; specially with how recent LLMs are, it's kind of hard to detect tendencies.

That said, if I had to take a guess, the impact of LLMs in language will be rather subtle:

• Some words will become more common because bots use them a lot, and people become more aware of those words. "Delve" comes to my mind. (Urgh. I hate this word.)
• Swearing will become more common too. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw an uptick of "fuck" and "shit" after ChatGPT was released. That's because those bot don't swear, so swearing is a good way to show "I'm human".
• Idiosyncratic language might also increase, as a mix of the above and to avoid sounding "bland and bot-like". Including letting some small typos to go through on purpose.

Text-to-speech, mentioned by @Shelbyeileen@lemmy.world, is another can of worms; it might reinforce non-common pronunciations until they become common. This should not be a big issue e.g. in Italian (that uses a mostly regular spelling), but it might be noticeable in English.

I dunno. If people can’t be bothered to write stuff anymore, I doubt they will be bothered to read it either. Also, the model deviates towards the mean by its very design.

Not quite the same, but I'm waiting for the day when people will pronounce street names like the GPS, instead of how they are actually pronounced. The street Schoenherr, in my neck of the woods is pronounced "Shane urr (yes, like the planet Omicron Percii 8, cause Detroit (Day twah) is weird), but the GPS says "Shown her". I'm really curious to see how long it takes for the computer voice to be considered the correct one.

Paging @lvxferre@mander.xyz :)

Source?

I just want to point out that there were text generators before ChatGPT, and they were ruining the internet for years.

Hey now, King James Programming was pretty funny.

For those unfamiliar, King James Programming is a Markov chain trained on the King James Bible and the Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs, with quotes posted at https://kingjamesprogramming.tumblr.com/

4:24 For the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to.

In APL all data are represented as arrays, and there shall they see the Son of man, in whose sight I brought them out

3:23 And these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, and all the abominations that be done in (log n) steps.

I was first introduced to it when I started reading UNSONG.

Why even cheat on that? The universe has a billion ad examples.

I'm not one of your students, but I do remember how I thought in high school. Both of my parents worked, so I was the one that had to cook dinner and help my little brothers with their homework, then I had multiple hours of my own homework to do.

While I do enjoy analyzing media, the homework I struggled with would get priority. I was the oldest, so I didn't have anybody to ask for help with questions, and often had to spend a larger amount of time than intended on topics I struggle with. So, I'd waste the whole night struggling with algebra and chemistry, then do the remaining 'easy' assignments as quickly and carelessly as possible so I could get to bed before midnight. Getting points knocked off for shoddy work is far preferable to getting a zero for not doing it at all, and if I could get to bed at a reasonable time, I wouldn't lose points in the morning class for falling asleep.

It just... makes sense to cheat sometimes.

Students and cheating is always going to be a thing, only the technology evolves. It's always been an interesting cat and mouse game imo, as long as you're not too personally affected (sorry).

I was a student when the internet started to spread and some students had internet at home, while most teachers were still oblivious. There was a french book report due and 4 kids had picked the same book because they had found a good summary online. 3 of the kids hand wrote a summary of the summary, 1 kid printed out the original summary and handed that in. 3 kids received a 0, the 4th got a warning to not let others copy his work :D

The reason chatgpt would recommend Nike though is because of its human-based training data. This means that for most humans the Nike ad campaign would also be the first suggestion to come to mind.

I'm not saying LLMs aren't having an impact, or denying that said impact is negative, but the way people talk about them is infuriating because it just displays a lack of understanding or forethought on how these systems work.

People always talk about how they can tell something "sounds like chatgpt" or, as is the case here, is the default chatgpt answer, while ignoring the only reason it would be so is because of the real human patterns which it is mimicking.

Brief caveats: of course chatgpt is wildly fallible and when producing purely generative content it pulls from nowhere because it's just remixing unrelated sources, but for things within the normal course of discussion and output chatgpt's output is vastly more human-like than we want to pretend.

I would almost guarantee that Nike's "just so it" was the singularly most popular answer to this kind of assignment before chatgpt existed too.

It's not just the internet.

Professionals (using the term loosely) are using LLMs to draft emails and reports, and then other professionals (?) are using LLMs to summarise those emails and reports.

I genuinely believe that the general effectiveness of written communication has regressed.