The literary world isn’t prepared for AI by Gaby Del Valle

None of this, however, explains the uncanny quality of AI-generated work, or what distinguishes bad LLM-produced prose from bad human writing. When I ran Nazir’s story through Pangram, an AI- and plagiarism-detection software, it came back as 100 percent AI-generated. According to Pangram, the most obvious tells were Nazir’s use of triads; the word “stubborn,” which is six times as likely to appear in AI-generated text than that made by humans; and the phrase “as if it had,” whose appearance is five times as likely. But here we have another list of three, written by me, a human.

They run their own writing through Pangram, and it came back as human written. But these tools are not deterministic. You can’t say for sure, that’s the point.

I for example am almost afraid to use em-dashes anymore, lest it be determined that AI wrote these words. It did not.

But it is an exciting time for sure. I read a piece yesterday comparing the SaaS industry to the Music industry, and how the SaaS disruption had already happened to the Music industry. The main point was how music creators are content creators now, who create content with music.

I think a similar point exists for writing as well. It’s all trust. And also, what’s the point. Writing does many things including clearing up your thoughts, if AI does it, you don’t get any benefits.