what the skibidi is blud yapping about :skull:

i will simply give a filmed interview in which i will be spontaneously articulate in response to random questions and people will know my writing is real. you on the other hand will sound like a literal retard in the same circumstances because ai use will have given you literal brain damage, as we already know it does. the gulf between ensouled individuals and bugmen will only deepen due to ai.

>>24693523
sorry, kid, why should anyone give you a filmed interview instead of any of the other twenty million new writers suddenly finding their pens with the aid of ai?

>>24693523
>you on the other hand will sound like a literal retard in the same circumstances because ai use will have given you literal brain damage
Yeah, mate, "I'm literally the author of this book, literally spending hours each day coming up with my literal magnum opus" would really sell it for me.

>>24693539
because those twenty million pajeets will have to avoid ever being on camera in order to not be found out as frauds. i on the other hand could just stream myself writing live in response to random viewer prompts or whatever. authentic skill will only appreciate in value in the future because few people will be able to resist the use of ai which torpedoes authentic development. the elites will raise their children ai-free specifically to differentiate them from the brain-damaged underclasses. ai is a trap and you fell for it.

>>24693559
The whole approach rests on the assumption that someone who's articulate wouldn't bother cutting corners with AI, but capability doesn't prove execution (think of all those articulate, Oxford/Yale/Harvard-educated politicians going on air to discuss "their" ghostwritten books).

The writing on the wall is a return to oral storytelling and artistic performances.
This AI slop with usher in a new age of unpromtable dadaism/surrealism that will probably be cringe as fuck, but will at least get us back to our humanity.

>>24693579
TTS?

>>24693573
>capability doesn't prove execution
but it does eliminate all the people without provable capability, at which point we are back to pretty much the pre-ai situation in which you also don't "really" know if the beautiful sentence you're reading was actually produced by the author or, say, rewritten by the editor from some much uglier original sentence. even before ai, anything you read could have been ghostwritten or plagiarized or edited so much it's unrecognizable. except, again, authentic capability will become more rare and therefore more prized with all those kids using ai for homework etc

>>24693611
>even before ai, anything you read could have been ghostwritten or plagiarized or edited so much it's unrecognizable.
I agree, though the dynamic is completely different. It wasn't the case that every third midwit on the Internet was writing stuff like "Did you use a ghostwriter to write that, bruh?" / "Did you pay an Indian $2 on a freelancer site, bruh?" / "Did you use a homework-help site to write that, bruh?"

Besides, for plagiarism specifically, the onus was largely on the accuser: if he couldn't produce concrete evidence of plagiarism in the form of an existing text, he was ignored. Now, with "AI detection" tools in academia and elsewhere, we're already seeing the onus shift to the accused, and the accuser doesn't have to produce anything but some black-box decision.

>>24693650
>It wasn't the case that every third midwit on the Internet was writing stuff like
yes they were. this is a superficial change. every person that reaches any level of publicly visible success will have an army of envious narcissists constantly trying to undermine that success by whatever means necessary and "i bet you used ai" is just one more angle of assault out of a thousand. you can't accuse jk rowling of using ai so the crabs endlessly recycle complaints about the chinese character being named ching chong or whatever, the dumb wizarding school map and so on, all in an effort to delegitimize her achievement. the substance of those arguments has never really mattered, they're interchangeable. "marcia lucas made star wars" etc etc.

>>24693582
I use an old lady's bong voice to read these threads. I'm blind.

>>24693846
Holy based. Blindness is the only way to counter-fuck the contemporary world. Unfortunately I lack the chutzpah to remove my eyes with hot spoon or similar method.

I care about talent, not authenticity

>>24693510
@grok what does he mean by this?

>>24693506
Why am I supposed to want to prove my authenticity? I know it. Get on board or don‘t.

>>24693523
Good post. The art of writing well will be regarded as a frippery, will still be cultivated by the best.