like it's a very frustrating topic for me because i LIKE claude + AI generally; I am in no way an AI hater. I find it to be a very useful tool and I get a lot of value out of it for code + studying mandarin + 'recommend me books on this subject' + etc etc etc. it has its place, and tbh it even has its place in writing that i want to read (i'd probably take a claude written instruction manual over a human one let's be real), but it makes me very very very annoyed that the people most vocally opposed to AI anything are also the ones most likely to be duped by it. this is having a really corrosive effect on the quality of writing writ large, because i'll open up a litmag or substack post and be like, ah, claude, chatgpt, there you are again, how the hell did you get in here? who let you in? do the people running this show really think your writing is GOOD?
it's like, my god, how are people not noticing when so many of the things you're reading suddenly seem to be written by 2 guys with really really repetitive stylistic tics. most writers, even if i'm super familiar with their work, i probably wouldn't be able to pick a page of their writing out of a lineup from a crowd, because they vary the way they write on the line/paragraph level, in a way that claude/chatGPT absolutely do not. maybe i'm just hyperattuned to language and so it visibly stands out to me. i may be the freak here. but omfg. omfg. stop getting grifted... arm yourselves with the correct tools to avoid this... go read some claudetext so you know what you're looking for at the very least. please i'm begging at this point.