it doesn't matter. i don't care if your words were generated by a meat brain or by a bunch of silicon wafers. a real question - is it worth reading in the first place?
my turing test happens after my ideological test, and most organic intelligence fails.
> it doesn't matter. i don't care if your words were generated by a meat brain or by a bunch of silicon wafers. a real question - is it worth reading in the first place?
By the third paragraph, I knew it was either human-written or you added to it - which is perfectly fine for me. For the moment, the things that make writing boring to me are also pretty good indicators of something being written by AI - banality and impersonalization, for one. As long as it doesn't set off any mental alarms I suppose I'm okay with using AI for assistance with writing if the author puts the effort into making the work their own anyway.
I am generally against using AI for creative endeavours - it rarely adds anything, and is just another capitalist form of human exploitation.
I want to read what other humans think and feel, because I want to learn and understand their points of view. A.I cannot do this, it can just regurgiate and spit out words, without understanding the meaning behind the words. With the increase in A.I 'content' it is more important than ever that those of us with something to say, continue to share our thoughts and feelings; to create the connections many of us are losing.
All that said, you are right that it's become almost impossible to tell if a writer has used A.I to 'improve' their piece, and as much as I don't like it, it is reality.
I like to read your articles Antonio, because they reflect many things I think about. I' m marketer too but I focus on very small busineses and help their owners, so I find it meaningful (my job). I've been studying and using AI. I checked your writing with the detector. Of course is human. I felt your words.... I understand what you meant. I care about the ideas .. and I think also that AI is reflecting human ideas (when AI reads opinion trends, etc). So, I'm not against it. I think is only a tool used by humans. You should write when you feel it, only when you feel it. That is what humanity is about, no? Libre albedrío?
I have never used AI and never will. My only knowledge of it comes from the mostly dystopian articles that I have read about AGI and ASI. However, I suspect that there are a few things with which it likely lacks any notable proficiency: humor (from deadpan to gallows), sarcasm (from Twainian to Trumpian), witticism (from epigrammatic to epitaphic), and irony (I remember the word but have forgotten what it means). I seem to recall a time when you were adapt at employing these literary devices in your writing, before whining about your day job became a preoccupation. Perhaps if you were to again use them on a consistently unexpected basis, your readers would have scant reason to suspect that the articles were not the product of the writer whom we know, respect, and admire.
it doesn't matter. i don't care if your words were generated by a meat brain or by a bunch of silicon wafers. a real question - is it worth reading in the first place?
my turing test happens after my ideological test, and most organic intelligence fails.
> it doesn't matter. i don't care if your words were generated by a meat brain or by a bunch of silicon wafers. a real question - is it worth reading in the first place?
that's the "bargaining" stage of grief
not grieving, not bargaining. functional extinction sure is a bitch tho.
Some people only eat organic food, but they pay extra for the certification. Similarly, soon people will pay extra for certified no-AI content.
Well, if you can't tell... does it matter?
Thank you so much for your piece. It made me smile for I know I am not alone.
By the third paragraph, I knew it was either human-written or you added to it - which is perfectly fine for me. For the moment, the things that make writing boring to me are also pretty good indicators of something being written by AI - banality and impersonalization, for one. As long as it doesn't set off any mental alarms I suppose I'm okay with using AI for assistance with writing if the author puts the effort into making the work their own anyway.
I am generally against using AI for creative endeavours - it rarely adds anything, and is just another capitalist form of human exploitation.
I want to read what other humans think and feel, because I want to learn and understand their points of view. A.I cannot do this, it can just regurgiate and spit out words, without understanding the meaning behind the words. With the increase in A.I 'content' it is more important than ever that those of us with something to say, continue to share our thoughts and feelings; to create the connections many of us are losing.
All that said, you are right that it's become almost impossible to tell if a writer has used A.I to 'improve' their piece, and as much as I don't like it, it is reality.
I like to read your articles Antonio, because they reflect many things I think about. I' m marketer too but I focus on very small busineses and help their owners, so I find it meaningful (my job). I've been studying and using AI. I checked your writing with the detector. Of course is human. I felt your words.... I understand what you meant. I care about the ideas .. and I think also that AI is reflecting human ideas (when AI reads opinion trends, etc). So, I'm not against it. I think is only a tool used by humans. You should write when you feel it, only when you feel it. That is what humanity is about, no? Libre albedrío?
I have never used AI and never will. My only knowledge of it comes from the mostly dystopian articles that I have read about AGI and ASI. However, I suspect that there are a few things with which it likely lacks any notable proficiency: humor (from deadpan to gallows), sarcasm (from Twainian to Trumpian), witticism (from epigrammatic to epitaphic), and irony (I remember the word but have forgotten what it means). I seem to recall a time when you were adapt at employing these literary devices in your writing, before whining about your day job became a preoccupation. Perhaps if you were to again use them on a consistently unexpected basis, your readers would have scant reason to suspect that the articles were not the product of the writer whom we know, respect, and admire.