One helpful tip per day:)
Pedro Lopes believes that the emergence of various GPT-like tools cannot entirely replace writing. On the contrary, it requires us to take writing more seriously:
- Writing itself is a form of communication. When people write, they make various choices through thinking, something that GPT-like tools cannot replace;
- Writing is also a process of thinking. In this process, we will think deeply, absorb more information, and what ultimately settles down is our cognition, while using GPT tools often skips this step.
In light of my recent experience using ChatGPT, I strongly agree with Pedro Lopes' view:
- Using ChatGPT for translation can indeed yield fairly good results, but it also requires experienced people to make final revisions and confirmations, as some details cannot be taken care of by ChatGPT;
- Using ChatGPT to assist in programming also requires experienced people to make adjustments, such as breaking down the problem into reasonable steps, allowing ChatGPT to refactor lengthy functions, and so on.
If you enjoy today's sharing, why not subscribe
Need a superb CV, please try our CV Consultation
Pedro Lopes 认为各种 GPT 类工具的出现并不能完全取代写作，相反，这促使我们需要更认真地对待写作：
- 写作本身是一种沟通。人们在写作时，会通过思考做出各种取舍，这些是 GPT 类工具无法取代的；
- 写作本身也是一种思考过程，在这一过程中，我们会深入思考，吸收更多信息，最后沉淀下来的才是我们的认知，而使用 GPT 工具往往会略过这一步。
结合我近来使用 ChatGPT 的经历，我十分赞同 Pedro Lopes 的观点：
- 使用 ChatGPT 进行翻译，确实能得到还不错的结果，但是也需要有经验的人进行最后修改和确认，部分细节不是 ChatGPT 能照顾得到的；
- 使用 ChatGPT 辅助编程，也需要有经验的人进行调整，比如将问题拆解为合理的步骤，让 ChatGPT 重构冗长的函数等等。