We're not far from nearly all future computer code being generated by AI because at this point AI-generated code is about as good as human-generated code, when prompted by competent humans.
This article assumes we'll never get to that point with writing. I know we're on a writing platform, but it's not impossible to see a day when it's much more difficult to differentiate AI slop from human slop.
When that happens, I don't think it'll matter what entity generated the text (just like it doesn't matter what entity generates code). What will matter is who is the creative director of that output, who approves the final output, and whether that output is actually effective.
The Atari shovelware analogy is perfect. 'Maximum Allowable Slop' – I'm going to borrow that. Makes me wonder if we're already past the tipping point or still heading toward it.
Great read. (Also, randomly reminded me of https://jarmualkatresz.com/ – totally unrelated, but same idea about knowing when something adds value vs just creates noise.)
This is an excellent article, with good research to back it up. I have an opinion too - I feel there will come a time, just like Atari, when the "Enough is Enough" protocol will come into effect - where the collective consciousness of the internet (I dream this is a thing) will be so averse to reading/consuming AI Slop with a perceived "lack of effort" that the curves in that graph might start to wobble...a time when imperfection to truly valued as the last few pillars of humanity in the digital age.
Love the analysis! I've been dealing with how to handle the rise of AI content, particularly on LinkedIn. I'm finishing a book and trying to figure out how to create awareness.
Read a book "0-10K followers in 30 Days" (clearly AI written) that gives the step by step to use Claude to create a social media audience. I played around with the advice and two things happened. First, it made me realize how much of the platform has become AI created, and two, made me feel icky. I had to ask myself whether I'm going to be algorithmically or authentically driven. It doesn't mean not using AI at all, but the "inefficient" amount of human input needs to lead.
Maybe I'm a Luddite looking to create quality fabric in a world driven to consume fast fashion content, but I hope you're right that eventually we find an equilibrium that values greater human contributions.
We're not far from nearly all future computer code being generated by AI because at this point AI-generated code is about as good as human-generated code, when prompted by competent humans.
This article assumes we'll never get to that point with writing. I know we're on a writing platform, but it's not impossible to see a day when it's much more difficult to differentiate AI slop from human slop.
When that happens, I don't think it'll matter what entity generated the text (just like it doesn't matter what entity generates code). What will matter is who is the creative director of that output, who approves the final output, and whether that output is actually effective.
The Atari shovelware analogy is perfect. 'Maximum Allowable Slop' – I'm going to borrow that. Makes me wonder if we're already past the tipping point or still heading toward it.
Great read. (Also, randomly reminded me of https://jarmualkatresz.com/ – totally unrelated, but same idea about knowing when something adds value vs just creates noise.)
This is an excellent article, with good research to back it up. I have an opinion too - I feel there will come a time, just like Atari, when the "Enough is Enough" protocol will come into effect - where the collective consciousness of the internet (I dream this is a thing) will be so averse to reading/consuming AI Slop with a perceived "lack of effort" that the curves in that graph might start to wobble...a time when imperfection to truly valued as the last few pillars of humanity in the digital age.
Seeing that there are AI slop YouTube channels pulling in that much dough was very depressing.
"Which brings us to the concept of Maximum Allowable Slop (MAS)..."
Hm, is this kind of an application of the market for lemons concept? Or maybe a sort of descendant?
Love the analysis! I've been dealing with how to handle the rise of AI content, particularly on LinkedIn. I'm finishing a book and trying to figure out how to create awareness.
Read a book "0-10K followers in 30 Days" (clearly AI written) that gives the step by step to use Claude to create a social media audience. I played around with the advice and two things happened. First, it made me realize how much of the platform has become AI created, and two, made me feel icky. I had to ask myself whether I'm going to be algorithmically or authentically driven. It doesn't mean not using AI at all, but the "inefficient" amount of human input needs to lead.
Maybe I'm a Luddite looking to create quality fabric in a world driven to consume fast fashion content, but I hope you're right that eventually we find an equilibrium that values greater human contributions.