Another problem with this take is that it's giving humans too much credit here -- there's a vast continuum from pure-human-creation to pure-AI-creation. Human

Another problem with this take is that it's giving humans too much credit here -- there's a vast continuum from pure-human-creation to pure-AI-creation. Human beings are given to (1) repeating tropes (2) arguing incoherently (3) missing the point, etc. Think of all the books and movies from before 2023. Isn't there a lot that is formulaically wrong/misleading/suboptimal in there? So this might not really be "poisoning the well" -- a more interesting area to look at would be, how can we make GPT-n aware of its own gaps and use this knowledge rather than just let the user know that it knows its gaps?