Great topic and thoughtful post. I use a set of skills to scrub the standard AI style out of my AI-enabled writing. Partly because I don’t want my work to ‘scream AI’ but mostly because standard AI output isn’t good writing. Overly simplified ideas showing a lack of lived experience make up so much of what the torches and pitchforks are attacking. That’s your point — those who use AI well and apply judgement are unlocking the value.
Thank you, Darby. I think you’re getting at something really important here.
A lot of people reacting to “AI tells” are reacting to people publishing raw or lightly edited AI output. And honestly, I understand that reaction.
To me, AI output isn’t the work. It’s part of the thinking process — ideation, exploration, iteration, refinement. The actual work still requires judgment, taste, lived experience, and a real quality bar.
The problem is that those same “tells” then get applied broadly, including to people who are doing that deeper work. It becomes a blunt instrument.
Your point about lived experience really resonated with me. That’s exactly the difference between using AI thoughtfully and just hitting publish.
This is such an interesting topic. It seems like people think using AI is similar to plagiarism, or it’s an issue of authenticity. But either way, your article makes the point that it’s neither, if the person is using their judgment and driving the work.
For the record, I used to use em dashes constantly. But I’ve had to change my writing style because I’m so fearful that people will think AI wrote it for me.
Isaac, the fact that you’ve changed your natural writing style out of fear of being flagged is exactly the problem.
We’re not just shaming AI use — we’re training talented people to write less authentically so they don’t “look suspicious.” That’s the opposite of progress.
For the record, bring back your em-dashes. They were yours first. And also: you’re a genuinely great writer.
Great topic and thoughtful post. I use a set of skills to scrub the standard AI style out of my AI-enabled writing. Partly because I don’t want my work to ‘scream AI’ but mostly because standard AI output isn’t good writing. Overly simplified ideas showing a lack of lived experience make up so much of what the torches and pitchforks are attacking. That’s your point — those who use AI well and apply judgement are unlocking the value.
Thank you, Darby. I think you’re getting at something really important here.
A lot of people reacting to “AI tells” are reacting to people publishing raw or lightly edited AI output. And honestly, I understand that reaction.
To me, AI output isn’t the work. It’s part of the thinking process — ideation, exploration, iteration, refinement. The actual work still requires judgment, taste, lived experience, and a real quality bar.
The problem is that those same “tells” then get applied broadly, including to people who are doing that deeper work. It becomes a blunt instrument.
Your point about lived experience really resonated with me. That’s exactly the difference between using AI thoughtfully and just hitting publish.
This is such an interesting topic. It seems like people think using AI is similar to plagiarism, or it’s an issue of authenticity. But either way, your article makes the point that it’s neither, if the person is using their judgment and driving the work.
For the record, I used to use em dashes constantly. But I’ve had to change my writing style because I’m so fearful that people will think AI wrote it for me.
Isaac, the fact that you’ve changed your natural writing style out of fear of being flagged is exactly the problem.
We’re not just shaming AI use — we’re training talented people to write less authentically so they don’t “look suspicious.” That’s the opposite of progress.
For the record, bring back your em-dashes. They were yours first. And also: you’re a genuinely great writer.