A software professional describes a growing trend where colleagues use AI to retroactively generate design documents, pull request summaries, tickets, and even personal messages after work is already done. The writer argues these AI outputs are technically detailed but lack context, perspective, and human judgment, making them exhausting and frustrating to read despite AI's usefulness for improving writing speed and quality elsewhere.
blog.colinbreck.com
· 2026-09-21
A tech commentator argues that while AI tools like Claude, Codex/ChatGPT and Gemini are useful for coding and research, they should not be used to generate written documents from scratch. The reasoning is that writing itself is the process of thinking through a problem, and outsourcing that to AI means skipping the deep thinking required to produce genuinely useful, well-considered content. The author does allow for AI to be used afterward, to polish writing once the original thinking and drafting is complete.
paulbakker.io
· 2026-09-21
An essay contends that people should almost never use AI to generate written text meant to convey ideas or arguments, even with detailed prompts or human editing afterward. The author distinguishes this from other AI uses they endorse, like transcription, data analysis, brainstorming, and copyediting, arguing only the act of drafting substantive prose should be avoided.
erichgrunewald.substack.com
· 2026-09-19
GoKawiil