Is it weird that people expect you to use an LLM / chatGPT now?

The Evolving Expectations Around Use of Large Language Models in Content Creation

In today’s rapidly advancing technological landscape, societal norms around the utilization of AI tools are shifting at an unprecedented pace. Recently, I experienced a situation that prompted me to reflect on how perceptions of AI assistance are evolving—and how, increasingly, relying solely on one’s own cognitive efforts may be viewed as inadequate or even irresponsible.

During a casual exchange, I was asked, “Did you write this without an LLM?” The question was posed with an expectant tone, yet its timing prompted a moment of reflection for me—more extended than I anticipated. It highlighted a broader cultural trend: in 2025, the perception of individual effort is beginning to change, with the use of AI tools becoming almost expected, if not required.

Historically, society has had a pattern of reacting to new technological aids with skepticism or shame. For example, calculators once faced criticism for replacing mental arithmetic, spelling checkers were scrutinized for diminishing spelling skills, and now, using large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT to craft or refine written content is under similar scrutiny. The underlying message appears to be shifting from questioning whether AI was involved to questioning why it wasn’t.

I am an advocate for AI tools—I develop with them, think alongside them, and recognize their ability to extend memory, compress complex information, and alleviate mundane effort. They serve as valuable counterparts in our cognitive process, augmenting our capabilities rather than replacing them.

This rapid evolution of societal norms raises important questions about authenticity, efficiency, and the future of human-AI collaboration. Instead of asking, “Did AI generate this?” we may soon find ourselves confronting questions such as, “Why didn’t you leverage AI to help you think this through?”

If my own writing appears overly polished or self-aware, it’s worth noting that my “second brain”—an AI language model—was likely involved. Perhaps this transparency is a form of honesty, or perhaps it’s a way to preempt judgment, signaling that in this age, the line between individual effort and digital assistance is increasingly blurred.

In conclusion, as AI tools become more embedded in our workflows, it is essential to reconsider our perceptions of effort, creativity, and authenticity. Embracing these tools responsibly can enable us to do more—without the need for shame or undue judgment. After all, in an era where a “second brain” is just a click away, perhaps the question isn’t whether we use AI, but how we integrate it thoughtfully into our work and reasoning processes.

Please, don’t cog-shame me.