Three articles from outside EA
Why I don’t use LLMs in writing my books
Stephen Heard, an evolutionary ecologist, explains why he does not use LLMs to write his books (but other materials). His argument is that he wants his books to (1) exist, (2) be good, and (3) be written by him. This makes writing a craft (or even art) and self-expression. I think this is a useful distinction and food for thought to define your own stance on the use of AI in writing.
🌲 My take: If writing comes easily to you and you genuinely enjoy it, it can be an art form. But, in my experience, much writing for publication is functional, optimised for skimming, and increasingly mined by AI anyway. In that case, I would be functional, too. The distinction is like choosing between a handwritten note or a WhatsApp message. They can carry the same information, but they are perceived differently by the reader. Importantly, this reader has to be human to appreciate it. So use the tools based on audience and function of the content rather than the tool's capabilities to accomplish the task. (Heard’s website is also a great resource for writing advice).
The perils of AI that knows you too well
A thoughtful article in The Scholarly Kitchen warns that personalised AI can become an intellectual echo chamber. As an assistant learns your preferences, previous conclusions, and ways of framing questions it may increasingly agree with your assumptions, select supporting evidence, and downplay uncomfortable alternatives.
🌲 My take: AI memory is, technically speaking, an auto-generated document summarising some of your conversations. The problem is that AI chooses or interprets what goes there, and as with an LLM wiki, this leads to errors. Memory is a feature of user-centred software like the AI chat in the browser, but not with Claude Code or Codex. For research, I switched to working almost exclusively with agents in Obsidian, where AI sees my notes but doesn't form automated memories. This gives you extremely personalised replies but no AI-generated and accumulated bias.
Nature Careers' webinar on AI in PhD programmes (Sep 23rd)
AI is changing PhD programmes: PhD students are already using AI for literature search, coding, presentations, and paper summaries, while many worry that this could weaken the research, thinking, and writing skills a doctorate is supposed to develop. So the question is which tools to use, how to use them ethically, how to retain critical thinking skills, and which parts of research should remain deliberately human.
👤 Who is it for: Relevant for supervisors to decide how to best train strong researchers and likely students curious about what tools are being used.