Feature idea: Auto Proofread \ stacker news ~meta

pull down to refresh

959 sats \ 13 comments \ @Krv 6 Jan meta freebie

AI is highly proficient at proofreading tasks, correcting spelling errors, formatting paragraphs, fixing grammar, etc. I frequently use AI for various writing tasks. What do people think about an AI proofreading tool directly integrated into Stacker.News?

The underlying implementation could be configured with a well-constructed prompt to ensure that only the proofreading aspect is applied. Users could put their text through the AI proofreading tool on Stacker.News and, like the preview function for posts, could review the proofread text to ensure it's what they want and make any necessary tweaks before finalizing their content. It could require zaps, similar to how other posts are handled.

Perhaps this could enhance the quality and readability of many posts on SN, and make writing things easier.

Is this feasible?

view all related items

268 sats \ 0 replies \ @siggy47 6 Jan

I could have used it this morning before posting Satasho Nakamoto

120 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 6 Jan

It's feasible. This sounds like something browsers or an extension should offer though.

547 sats \ 0 replies \ @PlebeiusG 6 Jan

Yeah. Building this into the site is a one-size fits all solution. Im leaning towards more personal AI deployments.

0 sats \ 5 replies \ @Undisciplined 6 Jan

As long as it's optional, I'm all for it.

476 sats \ 4 replies \ @PlebeiusG 6 Jan

Well it would give suggestions, i imagine.

How dystopian:

AI: No human, what you MEANT to post was...

30 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined 6 Jan

Either way: *AI suggestions or *Something you could see before you post and decide whether to keep yours or use the AI.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Undisciplined 6 Jan

Pretty ironic that I forgot to check the "preview" for that reply and the formatting was messed up.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @PlebeiusG 6 Jan

An unsolvable problem, really ;)

476 sats \ 0 replies \ @PlebeiusG 6 Jan

actually, twitter has this feature and I used to use it.

once you post it shows the post to you and waits for you to click accept! it was a good idea! There was like a 60 second timer though, so if you did nothing it posted it anyways.

I think we should just implement that!

0 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 6 Jan

could review the proofread text to ensure it's what they want

Wouldn't you then need to proofread it anyway? Just in a different sense?

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Krv OP 6 Jan

It would save time. Editing is a pain. After the AI it would mostly correct.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @PlebeiusG 6 Jan

People would blindly trust the proofreading and we'd be back at the same problem, ha!

12 sats \ 0 replies \ @Krv OP 6 Jan

Goal is not to have the AI generate content, but just ensure proper communication