> At the very least it's unintentionally disrespectful

There is ZERO CHANCE they have used ai unintentionally

> also doesn't care enough to burn bridges and insult you.

By actively using ai they are stating that you are so much beyond them that even a personal "eff you" is not worth the time. One would have to actively try and poke some personally hurtful areas to come off more insulting than use of ai.

I don't understand — I use AI to write email particularly _because_ I care about the recipient, and am confident the resulting email will more eloquently and accurately express my feelings. I'll also often edit it afterwards to ensure it's in my voice. Regardless, I don't think it's fair to presume that my boss doesn't case because an LLM generated the email.

^ This was written 100% by hand. Let's have Claude proofread it and make any suggestions:

I'd argue the opposite — I reach for AI because I care about the recipient. It helps me express my thoughts more precisely and eloquently than I might off the cuff, and I'll often edit the result to make sure it sounds like me.

Presuming that an LLM-assisted email signals indifference seems like a category error. The care is in what you're trying to communicate, not which tool you used to get there. -- https://claude.ai/share/3d3d1a78-381c-4fcf-9354-69b10f2d6f4a

So it isn't disrespectful, and neither is it respectful. A perfect nothing, not a thought or care involved. Like a 1-click eCard mailer.

Money IS the ultimate respect. Talk is cheap.

The only talk that has real value is "Hey, hire this guy - he's excellent and did an incredible job!"

In Fire & Blood, it is said "words are wind, but wind can fan a fire," so be polite folks.

Noted. Handing bro a cool $20 instead when he asks me to dial 911