Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Still Waters by Bridget Claire's avatar

So thought provoking, P.Q. I have SO MANY QUESTIONS that would take until the New Year for you to finally say, “Hey, you know that ChapGPT could probably help you out with these ridiculously low rent questions, dummy!” But, do you know if Substack is actively scanning our work product for any AI generated content that is OVERLY reliant upon the AI of it all? I read that two independent firms, unbeknownst to the other as being hired by the powers that be at Medium to investigate the case for true authenticity of content in their respective readership communities and both firms, independently found that the content of Medium was about 49% AI generated. Now, the CEO had a very important distinction between these two findings in that they were hired to scan the about 4.200 or so randomly selected articles and then detect what portion was actually AI generated, right? Well, the CEO was not buying the findings because the firms themselves did not set a standard quota for the actual AMOUNT of AI generated content that was being published by Medium authors which would make the case for those who used AI generated results as an outline for an article idea or possibly just used an algorithm to enhance an abstract concept that AI helped to make make more palatable for the reader.

However, I find it a tad suspect that both firms independently sampled arbitrary articles of abound 4.200 each, but they had IDENTICAL data results that were uncannily consistent with their respective sources. What is your opinion on this subject? I’d love to know your thoughts?! 😊

Expand full comment
Bruce Landay's avatar

This whole article felt AI written in terms of blandness. The writing is technically fine, though lacks a real viewpoint. The arguments are logically laid out and sound factual, though I have no idea how the author really feels. There’s zero emotion or heart or sense of a unique individual behind the words.

For me as an author that would never be good enough. For me as a reader, AI writing leads to endless retreads of prior works. Also, the training data limits the world experience and tastes of the AI generating the content. I’d rather experience the original work of humans than the bland regurgitation of a semblance of existing writing of dubious quality.

Expand full comment
16 more comments...

No posts