I like your take, Justin. I believe AI is awesome for finding and fixing issues of a technical nature, but I generally believe that the world of writing is way too nuanced for AI to do a genuinely good job... yet. There's so much human, emotional, and social intelligence involved in crafting a message, and AI is generally lacking in that department.

I also have to admit that while I love using AI for translation in my day-to-day (as an immigrant) — I even published in defense of AI translations here a couple years back — a professional translator told me last year that AI is still not adequate to the task of producing truly good translations, in that it often misses the author's intended meaning or mood. I suppose this risk can be ameliorated if the author is capable of quality-controlling the translations: if they have decent familiarity with the target language, they're more likely to catch problems and be able to troubleshoot. But if they don't have much of a grasp of the target language, mistakes will be made... and missed.

All in all, when it comes to the arts, I think AI is only as good as its user is perceptive. When we try to use AI to compensate for the artistic and arts-adjacent skills that we don't have (and oddly enough, I'd say this even includes writing on technical topics), we're bound to be oblivious to a lot of the ways in which AI is failing us.

That's my take. ;)