“This negative parallelism—‘it’s not just x, it’s y’ is maybe the most infamous AI writing-ism there is.
-
“This negative parallelism—‘it’s not just x, it’s y’ is maybe the most infamous AI writing-ism there is. It is something that is regularly called out as being obviously AI, and is the formation in the sentence Mamdani wrote that Spero called out. But I didn’t use AI. Did I use that construction because I’ve been immersed on an internet full of generic AI writing on every platform all day everyday for years? Or did I just happen to think that was the best way to phrase it at the time?”
Your AI Use Is Breaking My Brain
AI writing is impossible to avoid, is making everything sound the same, and is driving us crazy.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
This is why I’m so fucking irritated by all the slop and the people who are quick to claim any writing using an “AI writing-ism” must be slop. We shouldn’t have to second-guess our writing like this! We shouldn’t have to add “will this be accused of being slop?” to the list of concerns that lead to defensive writing. (Oh, how much I’ve had to hedge and over explain to cut off bad faith arguments and feedback from fuckin’ morons.) It’s just… gross.
-
“This negative parallelism—‘it’s not just x, it’s y’ is maybe the most infamous AI writing-ism there is. It is something that is regularly called out as being obviously AI, and is the formation in the sentence Mamdani wrote that Spero called out. But I didn’t use AI. Did I use that construction because I’ve been immersed on an internet full of generic AI writing on every platform all day everyday for years? Or did I just happen to think that was the best way to phrase it at the time?”
Your AI Use Is Breaking My Brain
AI writing is impossible to avoid, is making everything sound the same, and is driving us crazy.
404 Media (www.404media.co)
This is why I’m so fucking irritated by all the slop and the people who are quick to claim any writing using an “AI writing-ism” must be slop. We shouldn’t have to second-guess our writing like this! We shouldn’t have to add “will this be accused of being slop?” to the list of concerns that lead to defensive writing. (Oh, how much I’ve had to hedge and over explain to cut off bad faith arguments and feedback from fuckin’ morons.) It’s just… gross.
This is also why a pair of blogs highlighted on bubbles.town about reaching out to writers—and how anyone who doesn’t welcome that communication is just “in it for the money,” as if this is a lucrative profession, let alone hobby—rubbed me the wrong way. They seemed well-intentioned but also naive to the sheer amount of abuse, whataboutism, and nonsense some people receive for having the audacity to… blog.
Which is great for them! They shouldn’t have to worry about that or experience it firsthand. I have cherished some of the private, positive feedback I’ve gotten over the years, and I fucking love that other people are having a good time. But I also don’t read comments (and certain-fuckin’-ly would not add ‘em to my site) because the risk-reward simply isn’t there. And that’s been true since before people started entrusting their communications to plausibility demons; I can’t imagine it’s gotten better over time.
(I guess technically this is a sub-post. My bad.)
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
