Looks like the debate has shifted away from the actual topic: AI-polished text criticism is mostly rhetorical, you're not discussing my argument, you're discussing the fact that I'm using AI. Actually, I'd go further: in some industries today, not using AI at all is starting to be seen the same way as refusing to use search engines 20 years ago: you’re voluntarily giving up a productivity tool.
- “If your knowledge of manuals is so woeful that a PDF search can’t do it for you…” -> Nobody is arguing that pilots should stop learning systems or procedures. When PDF search replaced paper manuals, it didn’t mean pilots knew less. It meant they could find information faster. I’m not saying AI should replace knowledge; I’m saying it can replace part of the searching.
- About diagrams, I meant educational material derived from approved documentation, nothing else.
- “If the manuals are so bad, rewrite them.” -> not realistic, that’s not the point. The content stays the same. AI simply helps present and explain it in a way that better matches how each individual learns and understands.
The topic here is using AI on aviation documentation, not another sterile “pro-AI vs anti-AI” debate.
AI isn’t a trend that’s going away. It’s a major shift in how people access, process and interact with information. It will reshape dramatically many professions, just a bit as search engines, smartphones and the internet did before. Aviation won’t be isolated from that evolution.