Are AI content writing software/services any good?

[Ryuzaki]

I don't want to be rude at all, but I want to be frank. Your brain is either broken or you're being willfully dense, and I think it's the second, but I'll treat it like it's the first.

One of my sites has like 700 articles with like 15-20 sessions per day. (NON jarvis, all by writers.)

You're using this as an example of a bad thing (it is) that real writers only got you 15-20 sessions per day from 700 articles.

Now, the site I have used Jarvis on, is the site that is starting to get around 15-20 sessions per day.

Then you use the exact same example as a good thing, that Jarvis got you 15-20 sessions per day.

15-20 sessions per day might as well not exist. It's getting you exactly what you said from Adsense and Ezoic: PENNIES. Yet you're basing your conclusions on if humans or robots can produce you pennies faster. The insanity here is that you're basing your decisions on pennies. It's literally retarded in the sense that any decision made in this fashion will retard and stunt your growth. BOTH ways you're doing it are the wrong way.

just copy my competitor's articles (Copy their url and send to the writer) with no keyword research or game plan, no images added to the articles. Right now I am barely making money.

Big surprise there. But you're arguing to continue down this path, without doing the basic fundamentals of keyword research, on-page SEO, or off-page SEO.

The low-quality stuff made me around like 20-30k. But people I talked to who take it way more seriously fail. So this makes me realize that, if I do keyword research and stuff right I can definitely outdo way more people.

You say people who take it more seriously fail, but then you say you plan to take it more seriously, while advocating for not taking it seriously and treating it like a shortcut.

So you made $25,000 but you can't move out of your parents house and a job is just too stressful. I'm very skeptical of the claim that the thing you're saying is bad and a waste that made you zero money made you 25 large, while also the same results are bringing you pennies with Jarvis and that's meant to be a good thing. Makes zero sense.

Edit: I've re-read this portion of the thread several times now throughout the day because I felt bad about being harsh (sorry), and have come back and am adding this edit. I'm hoping I'm just confused about what you've been saying. I can't tell how many sites you're talking about and which are which.

But I did want to point out that there are people who take it seriously and fail, and people who create spam and fail. And there's people who win in both of those camps too. But generally what happens is the spammer hits a lick and then gets wiped out, while the serious person keeps raking it in month after month.

I'd rather be the guy making $5k a month every month for years upon years on end than the guy that made $25k with spam and can't reproduce the success and lost all the money trying to reproduce the success. Fly-by-night success crashes and burns when the daylight comes. Fast money comes and leaves just as fast. Meanwhile the $5k a month guy is now up to $10k a month with no end in sight for his growth.

 

[NoSandbox]

I don't want to be rude at all, but I want to be frank. Your brain is either broken or you're being willfully dense, and I think it's the second, but I'll treat it like it's the first.


You're using this as an example of a bad thing (it is) that real writers only got you 15-20 sessions per day from 700 articles.


Then you use the exact same example as a good thing, that Jarvis got you 15-20 sessions per day.

15-20 sessions per day might as well not exist. It's getting you exactly what you said from Adsense and Ezoic: PENNIES. Yet you're basing your conclusions on if humans or robots can produce you pennies faster. The insanity here is that you're basing your decisions on pennies. It's literally retarded in the sense that any decision made in this fashion will retard and stunt your growth. BOTH ways you're doing it are the wrong way.


Big surprise there. But you're arguing to continue down this path, without doing the basic fundamentals of keyword research, on-page SEO, or off-page SEO.


You say people who take it more seriously fail, but then you say you plan to take it more seriously, while advocating for not taking it seriously and treating it like a shortcut.

So you made $25,000 but you can't move out of your parents house and a job is just too stressful. I'm very skeptical of the claim that the thing you're saying is bad and a waste that made you zero money made you 25 large, while also the same results are bringing you pennies with Jarvis and that's meant to be a good thing. Makes zero sense.

Edit: I've re-read this portion of the thread several times now throughout the day because I felt bad about being harsh (sorry), and have come back and am adding this edit. I'm hoping I'm just confused about what you've been saying. I can't tell how many sites you're talking about and which are which.

But I did want to point out that there are people who take it seriously and fail, and people who create spam and fail. And there's people who win in both of those camps too. But generally what happens is the spammer hits a lick and then gets wiped out, while the serious person keeps raking it in month after month.

I'd rather be the guy making $5k a month every month for years upon years on end than the guy that made $25k with spam and can't reproduce the success and lost all the money trying to reproduce the success. Fly-by-night success crashes and burns when the daylight comes. Fast money comes and leaves just as fast. Meanwhile the $5k a month guy is now up to $10k a month with no end in sight for his growth.

Personally I do both white hat and black hat. It's like with investing money. I put 80% of my money in low risk index funds, and 20% in high-risk high-reward stuff like crypto. This way I hedge my bets if something really crazy happens + I got a chance of winning the "lottery". Nothing inherently wrong with AI text generation. Just gotta do it right (most people don't).

 

[bernard]

Welcome!

AI content writing tools are growing in quality, but can't yet match the insights that a human can produce.

At the moment, they're used heavily for short-form sales copywriting. When it comes to long-form blog content, they're best used as a writing assistant.

I just signed up for the Jarvis free trial and my mind is buzzing with ideas.

It's not going to be able to write affiliate review content for me or info content, but it has many other uses.

I pasted a url to a picture of a poster with a cow and this is what it wrote back:

"Do you ever feel like you're staring into the eyes of an angel? Well, with this Longhaired brown calf poster, now you can! This beautiful creature is sure to brighten up any room in your home. So bring a little bit of heaven into your life and order today!"

Now, let's be real, that's pretty damn good.

It's better than good, it's excellent. It's just a few lines, but yeah.

And there are other AI tools out there. There's an API to play around with. You combine those tools with other API data and a strong expired domain and hey.. well I have some ideas.

 

[CCarter]

One day there will be no humans on the internet left. It will be bots talking to other bots, reading other bot's content, and bots clicking on website's display ADs.

1. Bots are already talking to bots on Twitter (look at the comments and notice there always seems to be a polarizing comment from a twitter bot with an cartoon profile, usually less than 50 followers.

2. Bots are already clicking on ADs (this is old news, there is a whole industry setup to detect bot clicks).

3. Bots are already reading content (think TextRazor).

And now bots are writing the content.

It's not hard to understand why Tiktok has over taken Google as the #1 website. Video (think YouTube content) is the future, since Bots can't create videos, yet.

But add DeepFake Technology and we are getting close:

 

[Ahmed71]

I've experimented with Jarvis and guided it to write 1500-2000 words long informative articles for some super low competitive keywords.

Found that, most of them ranked 1-3 on google within 2-3 months in a fresh domain. I'd give 50% of the credit to the merit of the keywords, but the contents had a role to play as well.
Anyways, for Jarvis, my observations are-

• You need to lay off the skeleton yourself. AI isn't able to figure out the structure by its own.
• You should cue the bot to pick up your sentence patterns and follow it from there.
• CON: Many of the information that AI tool writes lacks credibility. Hence, you need to cross-check the information manually. Otherwise it'll put the UI at risk.

 

[kyou]

Hey guys,

Just signed up the other day! I come from a paid ads, funnel optimisation background, so content marketing and SEO are newer to me. I'm interested in starting a side project blog. I was wondering what people's opinions are on AI content writing software/services. Are they any good? If so, is it best to use then edit, or does anyone have any other suggestions?

Thanks guys!

Great to be on board!

Not sure about what you mean by good, but in terms of SEO results, I've had some surprises targeting keywords locally. This is with extra work on controlling headings, metadata + interlinking well. Content still read like crap. Client still got business from the spun content. (Yes, client was in on this idea.)

At a national level, I've yet to test AI-written content seriously. Got a niche site I've let the AI platform automatically generate content for. Automatic postings. Site is already performing well with human-written content. Not seeing any results from all AI-content pages published. It's been more than a year.

I'm sure if I put in some effort to guide the spun content (like the local one I mentioned) instead of letting AI determine everything, it can yield results. I simply haven't bothered with it.

 

[fstopeight]

Depends. A.I. doesn't come up with the stuff, it scours the internet and writes. So it first depends on your niche. The tools are hit and miss. There's two that made me spill my coffee:

neuraltext.com/ and gocopy.io/

But the idea of pressing a button and out comes a 2000 word article is still a pipe dream from what I've tested

 

[UFO]

I have a Jarvis account as well as a few other AI writing tools. They are like any other tool and can aid in production but are not a magic bullet and are not a substitute for your own brain in my experience.

If you guide them right, they can be great for expanding thoughts or helping with writer's block. They can also be great for bite-sized copy. They struggle with more technical topics as they cannot fact-check.

I started playing around with a GPT-2 tool a couple of years ago and wasn't really impressed. GPT-3 as well as some of the newer models are leaps and bounds better. The technology is pretty fascinating and will be interesting to see where it all goes.