Both are tools, they are substantially different.. they serve different purpose..
"I did some research (..), according to the source (..), we know (..), X (..) found out that (..)"
Is different than laying out the knowledge and pretend it was a collaboration between the author and the tool
"the tool", notice the tone, and the personification of the tool by the author, devaluates the people who contributed to the source of the knowledge and everything in-between
I'm not a fan of these "AI generative" tools, not everything is dark tho, i can appreciate how Bing chat always annotate the source of each data it spits; it's a step in the right direction, but I'm afraid this won't be enough to avoid our descent into biased assisted collective intelligence.. perhaps it's over-reaction, perhaps it's the way to go, perhaps it's similar to pre/post electricity, we'll see, but we should be careful, notice I only talk for myself, I have no problem with people using these tools, as long as they disclose it, wich the author did, so I should at least respect that!
Not very different. This actually gives me similar vibes to if author was thanking Grammarly at the end of the post. Immediately think it's paid for by Grammarly or at least question author's intent. It's an ad for a closed commercial product.
