the headline is scary, but the article is scarier, honestly.

“I learned about the incident from Chakrabarty, a computer-science professor at Stony Brook University. I’d previously written about his efforts to quantify the proliferation of AI in novels self-published on Amazon. After commenting on Tuch’s post, he plugged the whole column into the Pangram AI detector. The program estimated that more than 60 percent of it was AI-generated. I ran the column through four other AI-detection tools: Two of them flagged 30 percent of the work as likely AI-generated, one found no AI, and one suspected AI but offered no percentage.”

i think 30% is almost scarier than the 60 or the potential of a 100% article. that someone would rely on it and disperse it into their own work means more people get used to reading it and it being a part of their every day reading.

unknowingly consuming partial slop sucks.