Hi all,
I am generally in favour of using these tools in a moderated way, particularly for reviewing and improving materials authored by humans.
Agree on the concerns about copyright and intellectual property are valid and need careful consideration
As a non-native English native speaker and crappy writer, I found the use of LLM very useful. They can significantly assist people by identifying grammatical errors, improving clarity, suggesting alternative phrasing, and even checking for consistency in technical terminology. This can improve the writing process and ultimately lead to higher quality drafts.
Furthermore, detecting the subtle use of AI tools for minor improvements like grammar checks or rephrasing can be incredibly difficult, if not impossible. Many people already utilize various software tools to refine their writing, and LLMs, when used responsibly, can be seen as an evolution of these aids rather than a complete replacement for human authorship. The key, as mentioned is that "People who submit I-Ds are responsible for their content," regardless of the tools they employ.
Regards,
/as
On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 at 18:14, Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Joe,On Mon, Aug 18, 2025 at 11:44 AM Joe Touch <touch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2025, at 9:16 AM, Colin Perkins <csp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I’m unconvinced it would make sense as a policy for IETF to adopt for standards documents.
Why not?
Or, in response to such generated drafts, why wouldn’t I just ask AI to generate a 5GB “expert” review of such documents?
Did you try?I wonder what happens?BehcetJoe
