[beerd]

Hey team! I find journaling for a fictive audience to be more effective personally; since it forces me to try digest my thoughts for an external listener.

Then why not add the actual fictive audience through LLMs? That's how this was born. Feel free to leave your thoughts/feedback here.

[blitz_skull]

My condolences for building something cool to share with the world, just to have HN folks commenting on it.

The purpose and utility of this seem obvious to me, but I can already see the stream of typical HN responses coming in.

Godspeed.

[bwb]

Gotcha, why?

[throw20251220]

So you didn’t “get him”?

[acron0]

As some one who constantly chats to AI about an array of topics, I can immediately see the value in this. Thank you for building this. As other commentators have already said, I also predict a frosty reception but please don't lose heart. This is cool and will make people become better writers.

[basscomm]

> Hey team! I find journaling for a fictive audience to be more effective personally; since it forces me to try digest my thoughts for an external listener.

Okay, but I don't understand the benefit of writing to an entirely fictitious AI construct instead of writing to the ideal of the kind of reader you'd eventually like to have.

I mean, I get that it's frustrating to pour effort into writing something that effectively nobody reads (i.e. you never connect with a wider audience), but engaging with an entirely fictitious audience seems hollow to me.

[manuelmoreale]

> I mean, I get that it's frustrating to pour effort into writing something that effectively nobody reads

And if that was the issue this clearly doesn’t solve it since nobody is reading this.

I might be the wrong audience for this considering I have a public blog but this to me sounds like an insane product.

But hey, if someone finds it useful, good for them.

[multjoy]

Given that LLMs have no understanding of the text, what is the point of it?

[pessimizer]

To shuffle it up in semi-random ways that make you think. If you're determined to hate LLMs for any reason or any purpose, just think of them as an elaborate game of Exquisite Corpse or Ultimate Mad-Libs.

You don't have to think LLMs are smart or real people to think of them as useful. I love it when I can make an idea clear enough in text that an LLM can completely regurgitate it and build upon it. I also love it when an LLM trips over and misses the one real novelty that I've slipped into something; what better for an originality test than trying to choke an automatic regurgitator?

Transistors have no understanding of what I'm doing, but somehow I still find them useful.

[beerd]

I feel people talk to LLMs in chat format just so they feel there's someone listening. This puts thats in a journaling/blogging context, hopefully delivering the same value in a unique context.

[acron0]

What do you mean by "no understanding of the text"?