Draftsmith: Review

My review of Draftsmith, the new product from Intelligent Editing (developers of PerfectIt), was published by IPEd today: https://www.iped-editors.org/february-2024/review-draftsmith-certainly-has-a-place-in-an-editors-toolbox/

Draftsmith integrates ChatGPT with Microsoft Word in a seamless way. Although its target market is writers in the draft stages, it certainly has a place in an editor’s toolbox.

IPEd: Institute of Professional Editors; the professional association for Australian and New Zealand editors.

PowerPoint: Macro to change the proofing language

Caroline Orr, a UK editor, used ChaptGPT to create a macro to set the proofing language in PowerPoint to UK English, which she says works really well—see her second attempt here: https://www.orreditorial.com/chatgpt-powerpoint-macro/

In that second example, ChatGPT used msoLanguageIDEnglishUK in 2 places in the code to set the language to UK English.

If you wanted to use this macro and change it to another language, then refer to this list from Microsoft for the codes for other languages:  https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/microsoft.office.core.msolanguageid?view=office-pia

For quick reference, the codes for other commonly used English languages are:

• msoLanguageIDEnglishAUS
• msoLanguageIDEnglishCanadian
• msoLanguageIDEnglishNewZealand
• msoLanguageIDEnglishSouthAfrica
• msoLanguageIDEnglishUS

[Links last checked January 2024]

 

 

Some perspective on ChatGPT and others in relation to technical writing

Much of this blog post by technical writer and documentation and content specialist Michael Iantosca also applies to editors: https://thinkingdocumentation.com/blog/f/is-chatgpt-going-to-take-your-job

Bottom line: Look for the opportunities to make these technologies work for you.

As he says in his third paragraph: “Change is inevitable, and resistance is futile. Yes, jobs will be eliminated by automation, including large language models – eventually, but the workers who’ll be affected most are those who resist and fail to change and adapt.”

Word: Macro to convert one set of styles to another (revised)

A few years ago, I wrote a blog post about a VBA macro to convert one set of style names to another set of names in Word. One of my readers had an issue where the macro stopped running when it came across a situation where there was no existing style name that needed to be replaced with the new style name. I’d also come across this, but had ignored it and fixed up those mismatches manually.

But because I was asked the question, I used ChatGPT to see if it could offer a starting point for identify some VBA code that could ignore the ones not found. This gave my reader enough information to revise the macro for me (I don’t write VBA code; I can read it to a point and can record it or modify it, but that’s all). Their macro is much cleaner and doesn’t give an error where there’s no matching style name. It also pops up a message box when it’s finished running, which is a nice touch.

Some caveats:

• Test first. Test on a COPY of the old document before doing it on the original copy, and any other documents in the set.
• Make sure you’ve applied the new template to the old document so that the new styles are available in the document. (or, use the Organizer to copy styles across from the old template to the new [longer, slower method]).
• Make a list of the old styles and the matching, but differently named, new styles—make sure you write down the style names EXACTLY (including capitalisation and any hyphens or underscores in the style name) otherwise those styles won’t change.
• This macro runs a find and replace and replaces ALL. Test first.

If you want to use/modify this macro, copy/paste the code below–some of it runs off the page, so if you try to retype the code you may miss some critical command. Then modify each pair of Case and newStyleName lines to match YOUR style names (make sure you use double quotes around the style names). You can add as many of these pairs as you need.

Sub ConvertStyles()
'
' Converts old style names to new style names using find and replace
' Usage example: applying a template to a document where the style names
' for the same thing are different (e.g. now Table Bullet; was Table Bullet 1)

' From: Benjamin Abitan, based on macro from Rhonda Bracey, 11 Sept 2018: https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2018/09/11/word-macro-to-convert-from-one-style-to-another/,
' which was modified from https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29953322/changing-styles-in-word-using-vba [Christina]
' Tuned by Benjamin with the help of ChatGPT (21 Jan 2023).
' Rhonda Bracey converted the French to English and wrote some instructions (22 Jan 2023)

' Instructions: For each Case and newStyleName pair:
' add the old style name in double quotes in the Case line
' and the replacement style name (also in double quotes) in the newStyle Name line
' Set up as many of these pairs as you need.
' Note: The code for deleting the old style doesn't work, 
' but I commented it out and kept it in case someone figures that out.

 
Dim objDoc As Document
Dim StyleExists As Boolean
Dim s As Style

 
Set objDoc = ActiveDocument
 
For Each s In ActiveDocument.Styles
        'determine new style name
        Select Case s.NameLocal
            Case "Table Text - Left"
                newStyleName = "Table Text"
            Case "Table Bullet 1"
                newStyleName = "Table Bullet"
            Case "Table Head - Center"
                newStyleName = "Table Heading White"
            Case "Table Head - Left"
                newStyleName = "Table Heading White"
            Case "Table Text - Number"
                newStyleName = "Table Text Number"
            Case "App H1"
                newStyleName = "Appendix Heading"

            Case Else
                newStyleName = ""
        End Select
 
        If newStyleName <> "" Then
            With objDoc.Content.Find
                .ClearFormatting
                .Style = s.NameLocal
                With .Replacement
                    .ClearFormatting
                    .Style = newStyleName
                End With
                .Execute Wrap:=wdFindContinue, Format:=True, Replace:=wdReplaceAll
'                 ' delete old style
'                Do While .Found
'                    DoEvents
'                    .Execute
'                Loop
'                If s.BuiltIn = False Then
'                ActiveDocument.Styles(s.NameLocal).Delete
'                End If
            End With
        End If
    Next
 
MsgBox "Matching style names have been converted"
 
End Sub

ChatGPT: Some uses for editors

After doing a few ChatGPT experiments recently and having a lengthy Zoom discussion yesterday with Adrienne Montgomerie, a freelance Canadian editor, I have some initial thoughts on how editors can use this as another tool in their suite of editing tools. And just like any other tool (e.g. PerfectIt, Editors Toolkit, even Word’s find and replace and spellchecker) the results ChatGPT (and similar AI tools) suggests should be used judiciously and with a human eye and brain involved—keep what fits your purpose and the context, and ignore the rest. And if you don’t want to use it, don’t. Some people eschew looking up dictionaries and adhering to style guides, others refuse to use other automation tools—and that’s fine (there were plenty of people who refused to see any benefit in word processors, and before that the printing presses that replaced pen and ink).

But for those who are interested in how AI tools can help in the editing process, here are some of my suggestions (no particular order) based on just scratching the surface of ChatGPT—no doubt there are more, so feel free to add your suggestions in the comments:

• Summarising text
• Unpacking densely worded text (see this blog post: https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2022/12/11/testing-chatgpt-against-an-editors-rewrite/)
• Writing emails that you don’t know how to word politely (e.g. https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2023/01/14/using-chatgpt-to-write-editorial-notes-remove-from-acknowledgements/)
• Writing VBA code or identifying errors in your macro (e.g. https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2023/01/20/chatgpt-writing-word-vba-macro-code-another-use-for-editors/), but there are some big caveats with this as the results may LOOK as though they’d work but may not. Some discussions and developments in this area:
  • https://www.mrexcel.com/board/threads/can-chatgpt-code-vba.1225001/
  • https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-chatgpt-is-banned (Stackoverflow has temporarily banned the use of ChatGPT-generated code as it’s too riddled with errors)
• Rephrasing one or more sentences or paragraphs in several ways; for example:
  • rewrite in plain language
  • rewrite in a different voice (e.g. 1st, 2nd or 3rd person, or from a different point of view)
  • rewrite in a different tense (past, present, future)
  • rewrite for a different audience (e.g. ‘explain this to a 12 year old’, ‘summarise this for a CEO’)
  • rewrite to a word limit

General advice:

• Phrase your request in various ways—you will get quite different results depending on how you phrase your request, or whether your request is broad or quite specific
• If what you get the first time doesn’t really work, get it to rephrase in a different way (there’s also a Regenerate Response button you can click to get another variation)
• Use it as a starting place for ideas when you’re stuck, not as the end point (e.g. if you’re an author writing a report from scratch, you might use it to generate an outline based on the topic—again, you’d use this as a starting point and would need to be aware of what needed to be added or deleted for your circumstances)
• Try some other tools too (https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2023/01/19/chatgpt-is-not-the-only-ai-writing-tool/)

As with any editing, your human brain is the best tool you have even if you use an AI tool to kick off the process:

• Be aware of obvious or potential unconscious bias:
  • Who are the people behind the AI tool? What is their demographic? (e.g. are they young, predominantly white, male programmers living in a ‘developed’ world?) You may never know, but be aware that the people behind these tools have their own biases as to what they include or not. For an excellent documentary on bias (in facial recognition software) that reflects the demographic of programmers, watch Coded Bias on Netflix
  • Where have they drawn the information from? (good luck with that!)
  • Is there inherent bias in how the responses are phrased? (e.g. are certain groups ignored, such as women, people of colour, people over or under a certain age, entire regions of the world, people with various disabilities?)
  • Bias could be any one or more of these:
    • Is the response applicable to all, or just those in particular societies/countries/regions/socioeconomic groups?
    • Does the response ignore or discriminate on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, age, ability/disability, etc.?)
• Be aware of language limitations—as far as I am aware, ChatGPT only responds to requests in English and various computer programming languages, thus excluding/ignoring much of the world’s population, and there are certain areas (e.g. mathematics)  it has limited knowledge about
• Be aware of false information—try this: ask it to write a resume for you and check how many things just aren’t true (people who’ve done this have reported that ChatGPT lists the titles of non-existent books they’ve supposedly written!). Don’t trust the information given—verify, fact-check, do what you have to do to confirm the information
• Be aware of the base date of the information provided—from all reports, ChatGPT’s ‘database’ of information only goes to 2021, so any discoveries etc. after this date are not ‘known’ by the tool
• Be aware that, at this stage, ChatGPT reportedly doesn’t do internet searches and does NOT cite sources for the information it provides, which means it’s impossible to independently verify its results yourself

For some good summaries of what ChatGPT can and can’t do, check out these resources:

• McKee, Karen L Can ChatGPT rewrite your next scientific paper? (uses some real-world examples of what it’s good at and where it falls down; 17 mins): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnGPt030IG4
• Twarog, Adrian ChatGPT Tutorial – A Crash Course on Chat GPT for Beginners (excellent overview, gets a bit geeky around 15-18 mins with code examples, but you can skip that if it’s of no interest; 35 mins): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTxsNm9IdYU
• Bird, Hazel Why AI won’t replace human editors—and AI agrees: https://www.wordstitcheditorial.com/why-ai-wont-replace-human-editors-and-ai-agrees/
• Montgomerie, Adrienne Editor Vs AI: Common Grammar Mistakes: https://scieditor.ca/2023/01/editor-vs-ai-common-grammar-mistakes/
• Montgomerie, Adrienne Editor Vs AI: Is editing a dead career?: https://scieditor.ca/2023/01/editor-vs-ai-is-editing-a-dead-career/
• Currier, James How generative AI will supercharge productivity: https://www.fastcompany.com/90836481/how-generative-ai-will-supercharge-productivity
• Power, Harriet ChatGPT versus a human editor: https://blog.ciep.uk/chatgpt-vs-human-editor/
• Servais, Erin How to write and refine ChatGPT prompts to get the best results: https://www.aiforeditors.com/post/how-to-write-and-refine-chatgpt-prompts-to-get-best-results
• Fogarty, Mignon Unlocking ChatGPT’s Full Potential: Fine-Tune Your Interactions: https://ai-sidequest.beehiiv.com/p/unlocking-chatgpts-full-potential-finetune-interactions
• Johnson, Tom (4 December 2023) 30+ ways I’m using AI in everyday writing life as a technical writer, blogger, and curious human: https://idratherbewriting.com/blog/all-the-ways-im-using-ai-tools-in-everyday-life

[Links last checked December 2023]

ChatGPT: Writing Word VBA macro code: Another use for editors

In a comment on a blog post I wrote about using a macro to globally change certain style names to other style names (https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2018/09/11/word-macro-to-convert-from-one-style-to-another/), Joseph reported getting an error where a specific style name was not found. He asked if there was a way to avoid this. After looking through more than 100 results for my search term—Word macro line to exclude an unfound style—and finding nothing that was suitable, I decided to try ChatGPT as I’d read that it was pretty good at writing and analysing code. I reworded my request a little the first time, but kept the same Google search term for the second try, which gave me a different result.

In both cases, in less than 20 seconds I had enough to work with! And an explanation for how it worked and what to watch out for.

****

What I asked: Word VBA macro to ignore a style name it can’t find

How ChatGPT responded: You can use the “On Error Resume Next” statement in your VBA macro to ignore an error that occurs when the macro is unable to find a specific style name. This statement will tell the macro to continue running even if an error is encountered, rather than stopping execution. Here’s an example of how you might use this statement in your macro:

Sub MacroName()
On Error Resume Next
‘Your code to apply the style goes here
Selection.Style = “StyleName”
On Error GoTo 0
End Sub

This will skip the error and continue running the macro if it can’t find the style “StyleName” in the document.
It’s important to note that the “On Error GoTo 0” statement is used to turn off the error handling and return VBA to normal error-handling mode.

****

What I asked: Word macro line to exclude an unfound style

How ChatGPT responded: You can use the “If-Then” statement in your VBA macro to check if a specific style name exists before attempting to apply it. If the style is not found, the macro can skip that step and continue running without error. Here’s an example of how you might use this statement in your macro:

Sub MacroName()
Dim StyleExists As Boolean

StyleExists = False
For Each s In ActiveDocument.Styles
If s.Name = “StyleName” Then
StyleExists = True
Exit For
End If
Next

If StyleExists = True Then
Selection.Style = “StyleName”
Else
‘Code to handle the missing style
End If
End Sub

This will check if the style “StyleName” exist in the document and if true, it will apply the style to the selected text otherwise it will skip that step and continue running without error.
Note that the above code will check for “StyleName” in the active document, if you want to check for style in different document then you should replace ActiveDocument with the appropriate document name.

****

ChatGPT is not the only AI writing tool

ChatGPT has been receiving a lot of publicity since its public beta launch in November 2022. But using AI (specifically ‘large language models’ [LLMs]) for some writing tasks has been around for a long time.

At least 10—possibly 20—years ago, I heard of machine translation (MT) tools when I was working as a technical writer in the computer software industry. For those having to translate user manuals into multiple languages (as required by the EU etc.), these tools were essential for dealing with the repetitious stuff (translate once, re-use many times). Sure, they had their issues, but over time, and as the ‘machine’ learned more, they got much better. Ideally, in-country human translators were then used for checking and cleaning up, and feeding changes back to the ‘machine’ for it to learn better for next time. As each new version of the software was released, only the new information needed to be translated because the MT tool stored the previous changes and had ‘learnt’ the patterns, thus saving companies millions of dollars in translation costs (with software releases generally being about every year, you can just imagine how much it would cost in time and money for human translators to do EVERY translation into 20 or more languages for EVERY release).

Just to be clear, I’ve never used any of these tools or was ever involved in translation projects, so what little I’ve written here is based on what I learned at tech writing conferences etc.

Because the discussions around ChatGPT have interested me, I’ve taken note of some articles, especially related to how to use ChatGTP as a tool amongst the suite of tools I use for editing. Others have spent plenty of time writing about ‘the sky is falling’ scenarios in schools and universities, and some have written ‘let’s all just take a deep breath and see how this can work for us’ articles to counter them.

One thing I’ve discovered in the past few days is that there are PLENTY of AI tools around, not just ChatGPT, that summarise text and do other other writing and editing tasks. And some of these tools have been around for several years—they just haven’t received the publicity and hype that ChatGPT has. (Update 31 January 2023: This website attempts to list many that are publicly available: https://www.futurepedia.io/)

Text summaries provided by AI tools could be used for creating an executive summary of a report, unpacking dense writing, summarising a ‘too long, didn’t read [TLDR] article into the main points for a busy person to read, etc. Some of these tools (plus others) are mentioned and linked to in these articles if you’d like to investigate them further:

• A Brief Introduction to Text Summarization (Anne-Maj van der Meer; 19 Dec 2022): https://www.taus.net/resources/blog/a-brief-introduction-to-text-summarization
• AI and Scholarly Publishing: A View from Three Experts (Anita de Waard; 18 January 2023): https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2023/01/18/guest-post-ai-and-scholarly-publishing-a-view-from-three-experts/

And an academic article on LLMs: Dissociating language and thought in large language models: a cognitive perspective
(Kyle Mahowald, Anna A. Ivanova, Idan A. Blank, Nancy Kanwisher, Joshua B. Tenenbaum, Evelina Fedorenko; 16 January 2023): https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.06627

[Links last checked January 2023]

Using ChatGPT to write editorial notes: Remove from acknowledgements

One request I see quite regularly in the various Facebook editors’ groups that I’m a member of, is for others to help an editor phrase an email to the author explicitly asking them NOT to include the editor’s name in the acknowledgements*. There can be many reasons an editor doesn’t want to be acknowledged, including not wanting to be associated with the work because of the topic, or perhaps because the author refused to accept or adopt most of the editor’s suggestions and so it’s not work they’d be proud to promote. Whatever the reason, it’s best if the issue is dealt with before work even starts by including a section in the contract with the author about getting the editor’s express permission to be included in the acknowledgements. But in the absence of a contract, or a section in the contract about this, how do you go about writing a firm but polite email to the author asking NOT to be included in the acknowledgements? Editors can agonise for ages trying to find the right words, but what if you could use AI to get you started?

I’d been thinking about some of the ways editors could use ChatGPT as another tool in their arsenal and it came to me that perhaps writing these sorts of emails would be a possible task for ChatGPT—at least, to get a starting point that the editor could adapt for their own purposes. So with that scenario in mind, I decided to let ChatGPT have a go at writing such an email.

My initial query: Write a note to an author from the perspective of the editor about not wanting to include the editor’s details in the acknowledgements. Be firm but polite.

ChatGPT’s response (in seconds):

Dear [Author],

I hope this note finds you well. I wanted to bring to your attention that I noticed that my name and contributions as an editor were not included in the acknowledgements section of your manuscript.

I understand that the acknowledgements section is primarily for those who have directly contributed to the content of the manuscript, but as an editor, I played a crucial role in shaping the final product.

I kindly request that you consider including my name and contributions in the final version of the manuscript. Your acknowledgement would mean a lot to me and would also give recognition to the hard work that went into making your manuscript the best it can be.

Please let me know your thoughts on this matter. I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,
[Editor’s Name]

*********

Well, that was a failure! Instead of asking to NOT be included in the acknowledgements, ChatGPT wrote a letter about being included. Back to the drawing board to rephrase my request…

My revised query: Rewrite stating that the editor does NOT want to be included in the acknowledgements

ChatGPT’s response:

Dear [Author],

I hope this note finds you well. I wanted to bring to your attention that I noticed that my name and contributions as an editor were included in the acknowledgements section of your manuscript.

I would like to respectfully request that my name be removed from the acknowledgements section. I understand that the acknowledgements section is primarily for those who have directly contributed to the content of the manuscript, and while I played a crucial role in shaping the final product, I prefer to remain anonymous and not be acknowledged.

Please let me know your thoughts on this matter. I look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

[Editor’s Name]

********

I’d still want to edit this (to get rid of the extraneous stuff), but at least I’d have a starting point. If I did edit it, I’d end up with something like:

Dear [Author]

I noticed that my name and contributions as an editor were included in the acknowledgements section of your manuscript. I understand that the acknowledgements section is primarily for those who have directly contributed to the content of the manuscript, and while I played a crucial role in shaping the final product, I prefer to remain anonymous and not be acknowledged.

Would you please remove my name from the acknowledgements.

Regards

[Editor’s Name]

********

Because I removed some of the stuff I thought was overly polite (almost obsequious, but maybe that’s just me!), I thought I’d try again by asking it to be less polite.

My request: Rewrite but be firmer

ChatGPT’s response:

Dear [Author],

I hope this message finds you well. I wanted to bring to your immediate attention that my name and contributions as an editor have been included in the acknowledgements section of your manuscript.

I would like to strongly request that my name be removed from the acknowledgements section immediately. I do not wish to be acknowledged for my role in editing your manuscript. It is a personal preference and I expect it to be respected.

Please remove my name from the acknowledgements and confirm that it has been done at your earliest convenience.

Regards,

[Editor’s Name]

********

This last one is not one I’d use, but if the author was being particularly belligerent about this, it might be one I’d consider as a starting point.

(NOTE: I do NOT work with authors who write books, or with fiction authors, so this is not likely to be a letter or email that I’d ever have to write. I also have a clause in my contract about seeking my permission before including me in any sort of acknowledgement.)

More on using AI as a tool:

• https://michaeldennin.ovptl.uci.edu/2023/01/13/episode-37-tools-and-creativity-the-role-of-ai/

[Links last checked January 2023]

Getting linked to from Gizmodo

Lucas Ropek, a writer at the tech news website Gizmodo wrote an article a few days ago on 10 things that ChatGPT can and can’t do well. The original article on the .com website is a click-through carousel of each thing, but the Australian site lists them all in one page: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2023/01/10-things-chatgpt-can-and-cant-do/

So why am I writing about this? Because in the first paragraph, Lucas links to a post I wrote last month on testing ChatGPT for editorial tasks, specifically ‘unpacking’ a dense piece of rambling text. That post is here: https://cybertext.wordpress.com/2022/12/11/testing-chatgpt-against-an-editors-rewrite/

Getting cited/linked to on Gizmodo is a pretty big deal, so I’m ‘humble bragging’ about it :-) As far as I can tell, there’s been a slight increase in views to my blog since Lucas’ article was published, but I haven’t noticed any increase in subscribers as yet.

Testing ChatGPT against an editor’s rewrite

Some of the results I’ve seen from OpenAI’s ChatGPT (https://openai.com/blog/chatgpt/) have been astounding. Scary, but astounding nonetheless.

To test it out from a rewriting/rewording/editing perspective, I decided to feed it a piece of wordy text I edited some years ago. I copied in the original text and within about 20 seconds (maybe less) ChatGPT gave me its version, which is certainly easier to read and gives more information than the original even though it’s longer. For comparison, I’ve also included my edited version of that original text below. My task was to edit what was there, not add more information to the author’s original text, which is likely why mine is much shorter. However, mine took a few minutes to edit, whereas ChatGPT’s took less than 20 seconds.

For my first test, I just copied in the original text and pressed the arrow button for ‘go’. ChatGPT has no options except in how you frame your request. When I changed the request by adding Simplify: in front of the original text, I got a different and much shorter result. And different results again when I added Explain this to a five year old: or Write this as a senior student: in front of the text.

As with any AI technology like this, you would need to check the resulting text to see if it still conveyed your message correctly. And that the spelling suited your form of English (I did not test any other languages), and that the content it provided was accurate.

Original text from the author (105 words, 644 characters)

Another climate change related issue pertaining to individual MPAs where marine planning is pertinent, partly as it concerns areas outside of MPAs, is a required change in boundary or even in site location in response to climate change. Whilst it may seem premature to raise the potential for such changes when the process of identifying let alone designating all sites and providing conservation advice is still underway, it is appropriate when looking ahead over a 20 year (or more) time horizon. Indeed it is understandable why there is such a ‘gap’ in the current process given the amount of requirements and considerations to work through.

After my editing (19 words, 118 characters)

In relation to MPAs and marine planning, climate change effects may result in future boundary or site location changes

ChatGPT’s rewording of the original text (173 words, 1126 characters)

It is important to consider the potential impacts of climate change on marine protected areas (MPAs) and to plan for potential changes in boundary or site location in response. Climate change is already having significant impacts on the world’s oceans, including rising sea levels, ocean acidification, and changes in ocean circulation patterns. These changes can affect the habitats and species found within MPAs, as well as the effectiveness of the MPA in conserving these species and habitats.

To address this issue, MPA managers and planners can incorporate climate change considerations into the design and management of MPAs. This can include identifying and prioritizing climate change-resilient sites for MPA designation, and developing adaptive management strategies that can be implemented if and when the boundaries of an MPA need to be adjusted in response to climate change impacts. Additionally, it is important to regularly monitor and assess the impacts of climate change on MPAs and the species and habitats they protect, in order to inform management decisions and ensure the ongoing effectiveness of the MPA.

ChatGPT’s rewording after adding ‘Simplify:’ in front of the request (53 words, 325 characters)

Climate change may require changes to the boundaries or locations of marine protected areas (MPAs), and it is important to consider these potential changes when planning for the future. The current process for identifying and designating MPAs may not address this issue, but it is important to consider it over the long term.

ChatGPT’s rewording after adding ‘Explain this to a five year old:’ in front of the request (117 words, 602 characters)

Climate change may cause the boundaries of places in the ocean where marine life is protected to move or change. It is important to think about this when making plans for the future of these special places. The process of deciding where these places should be and how to protect them is still happening, so it may seem too early to talk about changes. But it is good to think about these things now so that we can make sure the marine life is protected for a long time. There are a lot of things to think about and do in this process, so it is not surprising that some things might be left out for now.

ChatGPT’s rewording after adding ‘Write this for senior student:’ in front of the request (121 words, 590 characters)

Climate change may necessitate changes to the boundaries or locations of marine protected areas (MPAs), and it is crucial to take these potential changes into account when planning for the future of these sites. While the process of identifying and designating MPAs is ongoing, it may be premature to discuss boundary shifts. However, given the long-term nature of climate change, it is important to consider the potential for such shifts over a time horizon of 20 years or more. The current process for identifying and designating MPAs may not adequately address this issue, resulting in a “gap” in conservation efforts. It is important to address this gap in order to ensure the effectiveness of MPAs in the face of climate change.

For more ways to structure queries, check some options here: https://medium.com/mlearning-ai/use-this-prompting-trick-to-improve-chatgpts-performance-aefd5d9ba0e3

For information about potential implications of this technology (no doubt there will be MANY articles like this in the next few weeks and months—ChatGPT was only opened to the public about 2 weeks ago (as at 12 December 2022):

• https://techcrunch.com/2022/12/09/is-chatgpt-a-virus-that-has-been-released-into-the-wild/
• https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/12/openai-chatgpt-writing-high-school-english-essay/672412/
• https://idratherbewriting.com/blog/chatgpt-automation-and-atrophy/ (long piece, but excellent points made about the potential effects of automation on writing using automated cars and driving as a simile)

Update 13 December 2022: This post (and others like it in recent days) has generated quite a lot of discussion in editors’ groups, on LinkedIn etc. (often about the future of working as an editor [aka ‘the sky is falling!’]). I’ve added below some of the responses I’ve made in those forums in relation to this post:

• On the issue of me feeding it text (as versus asking it to create text for me), I responded: Yes, I deliberately fed it the original. My ‘use case’ was on rewording/rewriting, not writing something from scratch. My test was to check how it would perform rewording wordy passages that took more time than usual for an editor to unpack. And this was one of them. In my situation, I work on corporate reports and some of the writers are less than clear. When your average hourly work rate gets hammered by a couple of paras that take 10+ mins to unpack, you often need to set them aside and come back to them later, or give up and write a comment asking the author to reword. Along with all sorts of other tools we use to speed up our work, I wanted to see if ChatGPT could offer a potential solution to these sorts of wordy paragraphs—reword in such a way that was clear, and perhaps more concise and possibly more precise. As with any tool, I believe that any such use still needs to be checked, but if it can stop my brain exploding with such passages, I can see it being something I may use on occasion.
• You are flagging a proof-reading role for the human technical writer/ editor following the AI’s processing step. Do you see any cases where the AI editor would not be able to perform as good as or better than a human? My response: It’s so new I haven’t really thought much yet about the implications of this AI tech on pretty much everything. My initial concerns would be around writing assignments that aren’t your own work and copyright and plagiarism issues at the school / university level; fake journalistic copy; potentially fake legal notices, medical info, safety warnings etc. (i.e. stuff that can have serious consequences). I have no idea if it can perform as well or better than a human editor. Because we don’t know its sources and can’t confirm the veracity of the information it writes, having human eyes go over the produced copy has to be part of the process. But I can see a time in the near future where it may be hard to verify what’s written once a lot of info is generated by AI. It’s hard enough to verify things now, when most has been written by humans. At a personal level, I’ve had some paragraphs that have taken far more time to unpack than they should, and this could be a ‘quick and dirty’ solution to that. And for reference, I only fed it that one passage, with no other context. It was from a UK report, though I’m not sure if that report was published internally or to the outside world.

[Link last checked December 2022]