Crosspost from my blog.

Synopsis

1. When we share words with each other, we don't only care about the words themselves. We care also—even primarily—about the mental elements of the human mind/agency that produced the words. What we want to engage with is those mental elements.
2. As of 2025, LLM text does not have those elements behind it.
3. Therefore LLM text categorically does not serve the role for communication that is served by real text.
4. Therefore the norm should be that you don't share LLM text as if someone wrote it. And, it is inadvisable to read LLM text that someone else shares as though someone wrote it.

Introduction

One might think that text screens off thought. Suppose two people follow different thought processes, but then they produce and publish identical texts. Then you read those texts. How could it possibly matter what the thought processes were? All you interact with is the text, so logically, if the two texts are the same then their effects on you are the same.

But, a bit similarly to how high-level actions don’t screen off intent, text does not screen off thought. How [...]

---

Outline:

(00:13) Synopsis

(00:57) Introduction

(02:51) Elaborations

(02:54) Communication is for hearing from minds

(05:21) Communication is for hearing assertions

(12:36) Assertions live in dialogue

---

First published:
November 1st, 2025

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/DDG2Tf2sqc8rTWRk3/llm-generated-text-is-not-testimony

---



Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.