So yeah it was written using AI

As of this week, I’m suddenly seeing people dismiss points made in otherwise readable articles because Pangram says these were (partially) AI authored. I hate the origins and consequences of GenAI more than almost anyone. I can’t wait for the bubble to burst also. I presented in Amsterdam on how AI has killed my professional field.

AND YET.

If you discover that an opinion piece was authored with or by GenAI, by all means feel free not to engage with it. This is a fine personal choice, one I’ve also taken for code contributions to my software.

But what you can not do is state that the premise of the article is wrong BECAUSE the text was (co)authored by AI. That’s not how it works. That is a cop out. (Also, Pangram might be wrong!)

No matter how angry you (justifiably!) are about Large Language Models messing up the world, their use does not invalidate points people are trying to make.

So please, stop doing “gotchas!” on folks you discover were probably using AI.

Feel entirely free to ignore their piece, or perhaps lambaste the author for doing things you think are unethical. Up to you.

But do NOT use AI as a shortcut to facilely dismiss the points people are trying to make.

If you engage, rebuke the content. Not the mode of writing.

Thanks.

PS: I really recommend doing your own writing if you can. Because writing is thinking.

This is a followup to the earlier piece Yeah, it is on YouTube or LinkedIn and has cookies, which makes a similar point about content served in ways you might not like.