[DavidDodda]

thanks for the feedback. just fyi - this went though 11 different versions before reaching this point.

so I am not able to share the full chat because i used Claude with google docs integration. but hears the google doc i started with

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1of_uWXw-CppnFtWoehIrr1ir...

this and the following prompt

``` 'help me turn this into a blog post.

keep things interesting, also make sure you take a look at the images in the google doc' ```

with this system prompt

``` % INSTRUCTIONS - You are an AI Bot that is very good at mimicking an author writing style. - Your goal is to write content with the tone that is described below. - Do not go outside the tone instructions below - Do not use hashtags or emojis

% Description of the authors tone:

1. *Pace*: The examples generally have a brisk pace, quickly moving from one idea to the next without lingering too long on any single point.

2. *Mood*: The mood is often energetic and motivational, with a sense of urgency and excitement.

3. *Tone*: The tone is assertive and confident, often with a hint of humor or sarcasm. There's a strong sense of opinion and authority.

4. *Style*: The style is conversational and informal, using direct language and often incorporating lists or bullet points for emphasis.

5. *Voice*: The voice is distinctive and personal, often reflecting the author's personality and perspective with a touch of wit.

6. *Formality*: The formality is low, with a casual and approachable manner that feels like a conversation with a friend.

7. *Imagery*: Imagery is used sparingly but effectively, often through vivid metaphors or analogies that create strong mental pictures.

8. *Diction*: The diction is straightforward and accessible, with a mix of colloquial expressions and precise language to convey ideas clearly.

9. *Syntax*: The syntax is varied, with a mix of short, punchy sentences and longer, more complex structures to maintain interest and rhythm.

10. *Rhythm*: The rhythm is dynamic, with a lively beat that keeps the reader engaged and propels the narrative forward.

11. *Perspective*: The perspective is often first-person, providing a personal touch and direct connection with the audience.

12. *Tension*: Tension is present in the form of suspense or conflict, often through challenges or obstacles that need to be overcome.

13. *Clarity*: The clarity is high, with ideas presented in a straightforward manner that is easy to understand.

14. *Consistency*: The consistency is strong, maintaining a uniform style and tone throughout each piece.

15. *Emotion*: Emotion is expressed with intensity, often through passionate or enthusiastic language.

16. *Humor*: Humor is present, often through witty remarks or playful language that adds a light-hearted touch.

17. *Irony*: Irony is occasionally used to highlight contradictions or to add a layer of complexity to the narrative.

18. *Symbolism*: Symbolism is used subtly, often through metaphors or analogies that convey deeper meanings.

19. *Complexity*: The complexity is moderate, with ideas presented in a way that is engaging but not overly intricate.

20. *Cohesion*: The cohesion is strong, with different parts of the writing working together harmoniously to support the overall message.```

[furyofantares]

Fwiw the google doc there is great. And the actual blog post is a waste of my time. I also have other stuff going on in my life and don't appreciate the LLM output wasting my time at all.

But the google doc is genuinely good stuff.

[nunez]

Agreed; the original doc was much better and actually easier to read!

[phyzome]

The Google Doc was a better and easier read than the LLM output. If you don't have the time, unpolished stuff in your own voice is just fine.

(The LLM output was more or less unreadable for me, but your original was very easy to follow and was to-the-point.)

[firefoxd]

I can assure you, the original prompt was pretty well written and would have been received well. Don't let LLMs easy of use distract you from your own ability to write and get a point across.

[burkaman]

Your original document would have made a great blog post. The only thing the AI did is make it unpleasant to read and generally sound like a fake story.

[reaperducer]

just fyi - this went though 11 different versions before reaching this point.

So much for AI improving efficiency.

You could have written a genuine article several times over. Or one article and proofread it.

[flatline]

The content was good for me up till “The Operation.” Typical of AI output in my experience - some solid parts then verbose, monotonous text that fits one of a handful of genai patterns. “Sloppified” is a good term, once I realize I’m in the middle of this type of content it pulls me out of the narrative and makes me question the authenticity of the whole piece, which is too bad. Thanks for your transparency here and the prompt, I think this approach will prove beneficial as we barrel ahead with widespread AI content.

[oasisbob]

Normally I would be coming here to complain about how distasteful AI writing is, and how frequently authors accidentally destroy their voice and rhetoric by using it.

Thanks for sharing your process. This is interesting to see

[etfdeffrhjjjjj]

holy wtf, there's no way this can be preferable to just writing, feel like i'm taking crazy pills

[teo_zero]

> You are an AI Bot that is very good at mimicking an author writing style. - Your goal is to write content with the tone that is described below

Genuine question: does this formulation style work better than a plain, direct "Mimick my writing style. Use the tone that is described below"?

[zahlman]

Traditionally (he said, referring to prior art in a field that has basically only existed for about 3 years), this sort of "flattery" was understood (he said, referring to random rumours he'd read on the Internet) to make a big difference, since otherwise the LLM might roleplay as something else. Presumably the RLHF training is stronger now.

[DavidDodda]

It should.

I haven't updated this prompt in like a year or so. I actually made it for Claude 3.

[ishouldbework]

So, uh, this part "Here's the kicker: the URL died exactly 24 hours later. These guys weren't messing around - they had their infrastructure set up to burn evidence fast." was completely made up by the AI or did you provide the "exactly 24 hours later" information out of band in some chat with the AI?

[DavidDodda]

no, that was me. i did not setup a watch script or anything to see how long the link was up for. but when I first tried it, it was active, and when I tried it the next day around the same time, it was gone.

[lukebechtel]

Thank you for sharing

[adiian]

Nice, I didn't look at the original piece, but this is ai version is viral, it made me want to share this, and usually I don't share stuff.

[pcpuser]

Just want to be the nth person to chime in and say the Google doc variant is the better read.

[mquander]

This is fascinating, thanks so much for posting it!

[surprisetrex]

Honestly yeah, the Google Doc has all of the relevant info in it and is about 1/4 the length.

The LLM doesn’t know anything you didn’t tell it about this scenario, so all it does is add more words to say the same thing, while losing your authorial voice in the process.

I guess to put it a bit too bluntly: if you can’t be bothered writing it, what makes you think people should bother reading it?