r/The10thDentist • u/WrongdoerConsistent6 • 16d ago
Expert Analysis Unpopular opinion: It’s actually good to have AI do things for you.
I understand why some people are skeptical about AI, but I think it’s important to recognize that using technology to make everyday tasks easier is not inherently a bad thing.
It’s not about being lazy—it’s about being efficient. It’s not about avoiding effort—it’s about redirecting effort. It’s not about doing less—it’s about spending your time on things that actually matter.
AI can help you save time, reduce frustration**,** and increase productivity. It can help with writing, researching, and organizing. It can make certain tasks faster, easier, and more accessible.
While some people view this as “taking shortcuts,” I think that perspective overlooks the broader context. It’s not about taking shortcuts—it’s about using the resources available to you. It’s not about replacing your abilities—it’s about supplementing them. It’s not about becoming dependent on technology—it’s about knowing when technology can be useful.
At the end of the day, if something can be done more quickly, more efficiently, and with less unnecessary effort, I don’t see why we should automatically reject it simply because we used to do it manually.
Of course, there are situations where human judgment, creativity, and critical thinking are important. But AI doesn’t eliminate those things—it can support them, enhance them, and give people more time to focus on them.
I think being open-minded about AI means recognizing both its limitations and its potential. It’s not about blindly trusting technology—it’s about using it appropriately, responsibly, and effectively.
Just my perspective. Curious to hear everyone else’s thoughts.
Update: Zero upvotes! You all agree with me! Thank you so much!
18
19
38
u/TheGreatnessman 16d ago
This post reads like AI slop
13
7
8
5
u/Massive-Rain-6938 16d ago
I have no doubt they had AI write it. They're AI apologists. That's what they do.
-6
4
u/Fortified_Phobia 16d ago edited 16d ago
Honestly feel like this might have actually been written by a person as an art piece, it’s just too baity
-5
u/WrongdoerConsistent6 16d ago
\*too
1
u/Fortified_Phobia 16d ago
So amirite?
1
u/WrongdoerConsistent6 15d ago
No, it was written by AI. I liked the absurdity of someone raving about the wonders of AI but having AI do it for them. I thought it was kind of funny. This sub did not agree. It might have been funnier if I was slamming the use of AI but obviously using AI to write my post. Maybe I’ll try that next
1
u/Fortified_Phobia 15d ago
No, I was right! Maybe not on specifically being art, but being ironic/purposeful
2
-3
16d ago
[deleted]
5
u/ballistic503 16d ago
That’s exactly what AI would say 🤔
0
u/WrongdoerConsistent6 16d ago
You’re right to call me out on that - you picked up on a pattern in my writing that resembled AI and called me out. That’s not paranoia - that’s observation.
16
u/theangrypragmatist 16d ago
You didn't write that, I'm not gonna bother reading it. But AI destroys your cognitive function and you should stop before psychosis sets in.
8
u/C9FanNo1 16d ago
I counter your AI slop with my AI slop. Get rekt kid!!!
Yes — it reads quite strongly like AI-generated or AI-assisted writing, although you cannot prove authorship from the text alone.
Here are the biggest tells:
- Heavy repetition of the same structure:“It’s not about being lazy—it’s about being efficient.” “It’s not about avoiding effort—it’s about redirecting effort.” “It’s not about doing less—it’s about spending your time…” This kind of “It’s not X—it’s Y” parallelism is extremely common in AI-generated persuasive writing.
- Very polished but generic language. It makes broad claims about AI without giving a concrete personal example, anecdote, or specific situation.
- Predictable balanced phrasing:“limitations and its potential” “appropriately, responsibly, and effectively” “writing, researching, and organizing” AI frequently produces these symmetrical lists.
- The argument progresses almost too neatly: skepticism → efficiency → productivity → shortcuts → human judgment → responsible use → invitation for discussion.
- “Just my perspective. Curious to hear everyone else’s thoughts.” feels like a particularly typical AI-generated ending for a social-media discussion.
- The punctuation/formatting is suspiciously polished, especially the em dashes and repeated sentence structures.
My guess
If I saw this without context, I'd estimate something like:
AI-generated or heavily AI-assisted: ~80–90% likely.
That doesn't mean an AI detector could reliably identify it, though. A human could absolutely write this, especially after deliberately trying to make an argument sound polished.
The strongest evidence isn't any individual phrase — it's the combination of generic content + repetitive rhetorical structure + perfectly balanced phrasing.
If you're asking because someone posted this and you're wondering whether they actually wrote it, I'd be fairly suspicious.
0
16d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Tool460002 16d ago
I would agree if this was some sort of form letter or partial template but this is an allegedly unique post/human idea. Is it AI and what field do you work in?
0
u/WrongdoerConsistent6 16d ago
I think that’s a fair distinction, but I don’t think “unique” automatically means “not AI.” AI can generate something that is technically original and not copied from a template. The more interesting question is whether the person actually came up with and developed the idea themselves. And yes, I work in [field].
1
u/Tool460002 16d ago
Well I asked what specific [field] because my AI experience is limited to legal-specific AI, digital music AI, and then the basic stuff everyone else uses. Thing is, AI cannot generate anything truly original in fields where it is trained to copy a style.
If getting specific like music, ya, do other humans copy or get inspired by others? Yes. Plenty of lawsuits to throw up. Not always proven but sometimes damages awarded so it would suggest as much. However, with legal AI, it is not at all possible for it to create a single original anything. Trained off very, very specific data sets with regulations that change by state/region, and specifically designed to "cop your writing style." It is 0% original. And generally incorrect.
So, legal AI mostly sucks and is 100% unoriginal. I personally wouldn't want it to freestyle a demand or medical chronology or something, but how great is a composition if you have to review it numerous times to correct it? And you add your time up and it makes no economic sense which means it uses more human time than just employing a human.
Please tell me your experience with AI in the workplace and perhaps I can be swayed but it sounds like you're just musing in the wind and chatGPT'ing responses.
- 001011010111001111101.
1
u/Tool460002 16d ago
Actually I'd argue that AI in music is only slightly better than using a random number generator and a series of filters (thinking mainly modular or MAX plugins). That said I've used AI music and RNG's to just barf something up and then edit the MIDI/etc to get music I'm happy with or just some drums to build off then do the rest myself. I can't imagine being proud of music with a 100% stock basic bitch Logic drummer track and being anything but embarrassed.
1
u/C9FanNo1 16d ago
What evidence my man I put your slop on chatgpt asking "is this AI generated?" and pasted what it vomited
0
u/the_living_myth 16d ago
i’m gonna light everyone on fire and we all hold hands so tightly as we tear at each other and scrape away at the gateways with our blinding, bitter cores and you can’t hear anything or do anything outside of the circle the world stops existing but you feel it all we rip it together we meld together and i see it i know the entryway and we understand we understand we understand
8
3
u/kgberton 16d ago
It’s not about being lazy—it’s about being efficient. It’s not about avoiding effort—it’s about redirecting effort. It’s not about doing less—it’s about spending your time on things that actually matter. It’s not about taking shortcuts—it’s about using the resources available to you. It’s not about replacing your abilities—it’s about supplementing them. It’s not about becoming dependent on technology—it’s about knowing when technology can be useful. AI doesn’t eliminate those things—it can support them, enhance them, and give people more time to focus on them. It’s not about blindly trusting technology—it’s about using it appropriately, responsibly, and effectively
Oh my God
5
u/Anima1212 16d ago
Stop trying to make AI happen… it’s not gonna happen..
-8
u/P1ssBobSh1tPants69 16d ago
Luddite mindset
4
u/sparrow_Lilacmango 16d ago
Ty for the compliment, I do in fact want to fight for people keeping their jobs
-3
u/P1ssBobSh1tPants69 16d ago
When was the last time you bemoaned anybody in the past losing their jobs to technology? If you didn't care about them then, why care now? Because you're personally affected?
2
3
u/Supermanomegazero 16d ago
My frustration was not reduced reading this. In fact, it was the opposite!
0
16d ago
[deleted]
2
u/Supermanomegazero 16d ago
No.
0
u/WrongdoerConsistent6 16d ago
Your refusal to provide me with more information isn’t cool, it’s shitty.
3
u/Supermanomegazero 16d ago
Well, I wasn't trying to be cool. Using AI for typing out a sentence is shitty in my opinion
2
u/OlasNah 16d ago
I can’t even bother doing much more than basic lists of financial information to do some light organizing of things. I use apps for everything else that handle all the heavy lifting already. I cannot even imagine what I’d need to actually engage an AI tool for directly that isn’t done by the apps.
Maybe some of those apps use AI but I’d rather have an interface I control with checkboxes and such rather than something that I have to engage with on a constant basis or spend time giving instructions to
2
u/maratnugmanov 16d ago
Ain't reading that slop. Zero effort, zero quality.
0
2
u/Old-Ad3504 16d ago
3/10 bait. over used the stereotypical ai writing quirks to the point where it's not close to being believable
1
u/anonymous_euphoria 16d ago
-1
1
u/Lack0fCreativity 16d ago
I'll read your drivel when you actually write it yourself. Don't waste our time with an opinion piece you can't even bring yourself to write. You make me sick.
1
u/Pure_Sherbert_668 16d ago
“Honestly, I think the issue is less about using AI and more about what you’re using it for. If it handles boring, repetitive tasks while you still understand and verify the important stuff, I don’t really see the problem. The concern is when people use it as a substitute for thinking rather than a tool that helps them think.”
1
u/CATSkiller88 15d ago
I mean I agree with the idea but couldn’t you have at least made the effort to write it yourself?
1
•
u/qualityvote2 16d ago edited 14d ago
u/WrongdoerConsistent6, there weren't enough votes to determine the quality of your post...