gioazzi

I initially liked to call it "unit tests for text", which inspired a prototype,[2] a blog post,[3] and then this product.

We believe everyone is getting really fed up of reading content only to immediately understand it was written by a robot. At the same time, we don't think language models are completely to blame, they are just a tool, and it's on us to use them properly.

The idea of UnitText is that before one starts writing they define a goal and audience for their content. It could be a blog post, but also an email... at some point we'd like to offer different templates for various types of content.

The human is the one doing the writing, and they can then ask the AI to "review" (or, "test") the content, to see whether the goal was met, the explanation is clear, something can be added or cut...

We built UnitText[2] with the same idea in mind, although we started from the "proofreading/copy-editing" part. Arguably, that's something most don't do at all... but asking someone to read your content, give you feedback, and iterate on it is an extremely valuable part of the process. Having AI do it means you can do it almost for free, and often. Again, freeing up more time for the actual writing.

Doesn't mean a human copy-editor shouldn't review your content before you hit publish, or a writer shouldn't read their references, but AI can help a lot with all those steps.

I see this as a signal. Many would like to write more, but they don't. I met quite a few developers at a conference last week, and did a rather statistically insignificant survey. I didn't get a single one to say they enjoyed writing. However, a good 80% said they would like to write more.

> the greatest trick behind blogging consistently is simply picking up the keyboard and starting to write

This reminded me of this post[1] from a few months ago. "Simply" doing something is usually not that simple, for whatever reason.

I think putting some structure to a process, defining a clear goal, is a good way to learn.

Finally, I really don't believe in the whole "writing for myself" thing, sorry. In fact, I used to think the same, until I realised it was (at least for me) sour grapes. Personally, when it truly is for myself, it stays in my Logseq journal.

I now "write for an audience". I try to imagine who I'm writing for, what they know, why they may be interested, and what I want to share with them. If I publish something, it is because I think somebody may care.

Then, I'm not really bothered if nobody reads what I write (or build). Meaning, I don't think I'm worthless or what I'm doing is useless when I get ignored. But I do consider it as some valuable feedback: if I broadcast something and get 0 replies, maybe I'm not building the right thing, or I am writing about something that nobody really cares about. Or I just presented it in a very poor way, and I can then figure out how to do better next time. Which is why I do think it's wise to spend some time reflecting and perfecting our craft but hey, whatever works for you!

Having said that, really happy for you that you manage to write so much, I wish I were able to be that productive!