Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

Zvi Mowshowitz now uses AI models like Fable and Opus for comprehensive editing. While this eliminates typos and flags conceptual errors, it adds a distinct step to his workflow, making the process slower despite improving the final product.

Related Insights

Top-tier AI models have largely overcome hallucination issues. When tasked with editing a book, a modern AI produced zero factual errors but was 'incredibly nitpicky.' This changes the user's role from a fact-checker to a manager who must use judgment to filter an abundance of accurate but minor feedback.

Tools like Suno for music or Gemini for images enable creators to produce higher-quality, more engaging content. However, this doesn't save time. Instead, it introduces new, time-consuming steps, raising the bar for what's considered a complete product.

When AI agents handle the bulk of text generation, the human's role shifts from primary author to a high-level director. Instead of writing from scratch, the human intervenes sparingly to make crucial changes, a feeling described as "God coming down" to add a single sentence.

As AI floods the digital space with grammatically correct but often bland or nonsensical content, the most valuable skill is shifting from pure writing to high-level editing. The ability to refine text, check for meaning, and ensure creativity—tasks where AI is weak—is becoming more critical and valuable.

The best use of AI in content creation isn't for writing the first draft. Instead, apply it to the tedious parts of the process you dislike, such as data processing, topic ideation, or even editing, to accelerate the path to a high-quality, human-created piece.

While AI tools excel at generating initial drafts of code or designs, their editing capabilities are poor. The difficulty of making specific changes often forces creators to discard the AI output and start over, as editing is where the "magic" breaks down.

Contrary to the sales pitch, AI tools can create more work for educators. The time required to verify facts, fix AI-generated errors, and correct hallucinations in lesson plans or translations often negates any initial time savings, a pattern also observed with software coders.

AI is a poor substitute for authentic writing and cannot replicate a unique voice. However, it's an invaluable tool for accelerating the editing process. By feeding it drafts and previous work, you can get instant, objective feedback on flow, repetition, and weak points, creating a faster feedback loop than human editors alone.

AI will automate the creation of first drafts, which are often based on existing ideas. This shifts the value from initial creation to refinement. The editor, who curates and improves the AI's output, will become more critical and valued than the writer who once created from scratch.

Top performers don't use AI to produce more mediocre documents. Instead, they use the time saved to go deeper—aggressively interrogating AI output, fixing underlying logic, and having critical strategic conversations they previously skipped. This transforms generated 'slop' into exceptional work.