Human writers have a moral responsibility to call out and label people who flood the internet with AI slop. I’m sure some of the guilty offenders will insist that their AI written content is different from other people’s AI content because of how they prompted it, how they edited it, or some other asinine reason. Intolerance for AI content here is the only way we can protect human writers, whose output takes far more effort to produce and can never match the volume LLMs are capable of generating. I have no interest in reading AI written content and consider it all garbage. If the cost of protecting a sanctuary is a witch hunt that sometimes results in false positives, so be it. The other alternative is no sanctuary. Which is far far worse.
"I would, of course, rather have people who disguise themselves as writers not use AI to plague the web with slop in the first place but, alas, it’s not in my hand to overhaul the human condition: they are doing it—like actual witches, they cast their prompts and spread the malaise—and so we must be unremorsefully inquisitorial."
Lessee here... Two em-dashas AND a colon... Not technically a run-on but definitely a sentence that, as it were, runs on... IDUNNO DUDE🧐🧐🧐. There's definitely gna be a seven-fingered hand somewhere in this essay dadburn it!!...
How exactly would the autos-da-fé work in this particular inquisition? Asking for a friend
Although it's going to be essential to retain a healthy skepticism for tools like Pangram, lest they become the autos-da-fé themselves.
In particular, a VERY close eye will need to be kept on whether Pangram, or any other such tool, disproportionately flags pieces/authors with politically incorrect points of view as “slop”—and we should all be much, much MORE inquisitorial about heaping disgrace on them if they do.
Human writers have a moral responsibility to call out and label people who flood the internet with AI slop. I’m sure some of the guilty offenders will insist that their AI written content is different from other people’s AI content because of how they prompted it, how they edited it, or some other asinine reason. Intolerance for AI content here is the only way we can protect human writers, whose output takes far more effort to produce and can never match the volume LLMs are capable of generating. I have no interest in reading AI written content and consider it all garbage. If the cost of protecting a sanctuary is a witch hunt that sometimes results in false positives, so be it. The other alternative is no sanctuary. Which is far far worse.
Yes, pretty much
"I would, of course, rather have people who disguise themselves as writers not use AI to plague the web with slop in the first place but, alas, it’s not in my hand to overhaul the human condition: they are doing it—like actual witches, they cast their prompts and spread the malaise—and so we must be unremorsefully inquisitorial."
Lessee here... Two em-dashas AND a colon... Not technically a run-on but definitely a sentence that, as it were, runs on... IDUNNO DUDE🧐🧐🧐. There's definitely gna be a seven-fingered hand somewhere in this essay dadburn it!!...
How exactly would the autos-da-fé work in this particular inquisition? Asking for a friend
(enjoy your vacation!)
Hopefully this is a joke. And thanks!
🤪🤪🤪.
Although it's going to be essential to retain a healthy skepticism for tools like Pangram, lest they become the autos-da-fé themselves.
In particular, a VERY close eye will need to be kept on whether Pangram, or any other such tool, disproportionately flags pieces/authors with politically incorrect points of view as “slop”—and we should all be much, much MORE inquisitorial about heaping disgrace on them if they do.
Civilization pay walled. Love it.
We are rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Arguing about nonsense while Ai is taking control of the decision space.
We are the horse building the car. We will soon be irrelevant. The horse didn’t disappear it became a pet.
How’s that for novelty? Did an Ai write that?
Wake up folks this is all a distraction.
Novelty and value for my time. I don’t care where it comes from. Most humans have nothing new to say why not give Ai shot.
You wrote:
"This is bigger than Pangram. Or AI. This is bigger than writing itself. Our society is at stake—our humanity is at stake."
Neither Society nor humanity is in danger because someone used Claude or Chatgpt to help them write an article they submitted to Substack or Medium.
Please get over yourself.
I think it is