I'm relieved AI is only a medium-quality editor and can't replace the collaboration and meaningful human relationships that are the real value of my work — though I don't want everything to be reduced to mere 'vibes' or being uniquely human.

The author is relieved AI can't fully replace human collaboration and meaningful relationships, and reflects on wanting to feel smart via his own analysis rather than be valued merely for being human. ✦ AI generated

The author · Platformer · 2026-08-06 · original ↗

While we are winding the Claudeasey experiment down — Casey has unfortunately decided to stay on as my boss — I do actually think I will be using LLMs for some editing tasks I previously relied on him for. And while in some sense that is a blessing — no human should have to delete as many unnecessary uses of “very,” “almost,” and “sort of” from my drafts as Casey already does — for now I am sort of relieved that Claude is only a medium-quality editor. I like having a real person help me figure out what does and doesn’t work in my drafts. Something about that collaboration feels inherently meaningful! Similarly, I’ve experimented with using Claude for one of the main functionalities I rely on Casey for — pinging me to do tasks — and it doesn’t make me more productive, because I don’t care what an LLM thinks of me. But — even if that means we have job security, which I truly am not sure about — I don’t want everything I do to be about vibes, or being uniquely human! I don’t want to be an influencer. I want to feel smart. I want my analysis to be my own, because it’s good, not because someone wants it coming directly from a human. If LLM capabilities continue on this trajectory, that’s a kind of existential angst that all professions will have to face, including journalism.

Read full article ↗excerpt · fair-use quotation