this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2026
13 points (93.3% liked)
Bad News
144 readers
20 users here now
most lemmy communities have some bad news, but this one is all bad all the time.
see also: !goodnews
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think a major threat that AI poses to human creative works that almost no one is talking about is the fact that humans are choosing/are forced to be less human as some kind of retaliation against AI. This is one example. I've also seen threads on AskLemmy that's totally reasonable for a human to want to ask for themselves being accused of farming responses for AI training. Certain punctuation marks and grammatical patterns are being stigmatised because AI uses them. I don't have solutions for any of this but at some point you really have to ask, is it really worth it to limit or even stigmatize certain aspects of human creativity because of AI? Even if we assume that all AI is objectively wrong, we've clearly seen that AI development is hardly even inconvenienced by these attempts. Are we not partially fulfilling the prophecy of AI destroying human creativity by actively forcing creative humans to "prove" they're not AI or limiting what they can do creatively because AI happens to also do those things.
You can take my em dashes—from my cold, dead fingers.
That's how I feel as well. The real problem is this hysteria over whether something has been written or edited by AI or not. In my view, it doesn't actually matter one bit. What really matters is the quality of the content. If it's an article then we can ask does it read well, is it factually correct, does it convey its point coherently, is it engaging, and so on. That's what ultimately important.
I also feel that there's an aspect of capitalist conditioning at play here. The reason people care about whether something is written by AI or not is because they ascribe more value to human produced content. And what people are really upset about is that their skills are losing value. Outside that framework it simply wouldn't matter. If I wanted to write some poetry or a story, I could do it, and it wouldn't matter one bit whether AI can do it too. We haven't stopped playing chess just because computers can beat the best chess players now. We play the game because it's enjoyable to us. I'd argue that we should apply the same logic to generative AI as well. Sure, it can produce content that's as good as content created by humans, but so what? How does it detract from humans doing what humans enjoy doing?
ai;dr
i'm kidding in this case; i actually did read your comment.but, more and more frequently i do find myself stopping reading something due to suspecting (broadly speaking, because of the "quality of the content") that it is likely to be LLM output.