In today's fast-paced digital landscape, the ability to express oneself effectively and fluently has always been vital. However, with the introduction of OpenAI's GPT-4, the importance of mastering the art of writing has been significantly diminished. As the AI handles language fluency, the only aspect that truly matters now is having original ideas. As a result, everyone can write effortlessly, but standing out from the crowd requires a continuous flow of innovative thoughts.
"GPT-4 has revolutionized the writing landscape by eliminating the need for fluency and making the process more accessible to everyone. However, this has also shifted the emphasis to being an original thinker, making creativity and originality more crucial than ever. To excel in this new paradigm, writers have to continually push the boundaries of conventional thinking and strive to bring groundbreaking ideas to the table."
Replace GPT-4 with "blogging" and then "social media" to get paragraphs that would still make perfect sense as good-faith predictions written in 2003 and respectively 2013. Then let's talk.
I believe there is a distinction between them. Blogging remains a form of traditional writing, simply presented on a different platform. To attract an audience, it is still essential to craft captivating prose.
My point was, and is, that the belief that "X will make process Y more accessible to everyone" will automatically yeld good results is very often misplaced, and we should have learned this by now. As in "social media will make instantly talking online more accessible to everyone": look what the result is.
Also, this:
"To attract an audience, it is still essential to craft captivating prose."
is NOT true at all. As a minimum, it's not complete, without "and it is essential that people are willing to look at captivating prose and groundbreaking ideas even if it takes more than one second".
If that sentence were true as is, I would have never needed to come to Substack, see:
First of all, I did not say it will necessarily yield good results. I just said it will remove many unoriginal thinkers.
Second, social media does produce a lot of good things. Social media provides numerous benefits, including global connectivity, real-time information sharing, networking opportunities, and diverse entertainment options. It allows individuals to engage in educational activities, build communities based on shared interests, and express their creativity. Social media also offers support networks, platforms for raising awareness on social issues, and effective marketing channels for businesses.
"GPT-4 has revolutionized the writing landscape by eliminating the need for fluency and making the process more accessible to everyone. However, this has also shifted the emphasis to being an original thinker, making creativity and originality more crucial than ever. To excel in this new paradigm, writers have to continually push the boundaries of conventional thinking and strive to bring groundbreaking ideas to the table."
Replace GPT-4 with "blogging" and then "social media" to get paragraphs that would still make perfect sense as good-faith predictions written in 2003 and respectively 2013. Then let's talk.
I believe there is a distinction between them. Blogging remains a form of traditional writing, simply presented on a different platform. To attract an audience, it is still essential to craft captivating prose.
My point was, and is, that the belief that "X will make process Y more accessible to everyone" will automatically yeld good results is very often misplaced, and we should have learned this by now. As in "social media will make instantly talking online more accessible to everyone": look what the result is.
Also, this:
"To attract an audience, it is still essential to craft captivating prose."
is NOT true at all. As a minimum, it's not complete, without "and it is essential that people are willing to look at captivating prose and groundbreaking ideas even if it takes more than one second".
If that sentence were true as is, I would have never needed to come to Substack, see:
https://mfioretti.substack.com/p/i-just-started-a-newsletter-and-its
and then this:
https://mfioretti.substack.com/p/substack-notes-chris-best-and-now
First of all, I did not say it will necessarily yield good results. I just said it will remove many unoriginal thinkers.
Second, social media does produce a lot of good things. Social media provides numerous benefits, including global connectivity, real-time information sharing, networking opportunities, and diverse entertainment options. It allows individuals to engage in educational activities, build communities based on shared interests, and express their creativity. Social media also offers support networks, platforms for raising awareness on social issues, and effective marketing channels for businesses.
People just focus on the negative thing too much.