4 ms·
It's not remotely beautifully written. It reads as if someone prompted "Write an article called I Miss Terry Pratchett, and write it in his style." It's full o
by rogual 4mo ago
It's not remotely beautifully written. It reads as if someone prompted "Write an article called I Miss Terry Pratchett, and write it in his style."
It's full of attempted Pratchettisms that, if you're paying attention, make no sense.
It's on a blog where almost every post is about AI.
It's the opposite of Terry's warm, intelligent, humanist writing and an insult to his name.
- vintagedave 4mo agoI suppose in the AI era, we need to assume AI. For me, I feel like 'attempted Pratchettisms' might well be the result of a human writing. It's hard to be as good as Pratchett but understandable to write a post like this trying to be. That is, with ambiguity, I try to assume the best. I expect that is somewhat naïve. I genuinely read (and still do) the blog as a human voice. I don't think writing about AI is enough to assume that a blog is authored by AI.
- neogodless 4mo agoIf the AI-generated content doesn't push out all the good stuff, the absolute flood of accusing everything written everywhere as being written by AI will.
- mpalmer 4mo ago"a kind of paper that already looks guilty"
- onraglanroad 4mo agoI like that line. The kind of cheap floozy paper that suggests something bad has been written on it, even when it's perfectly innocent.
- npinsker 4mo agoThat’s not looking “guilty” though. Paper cannot be guilty, only humans.
- vintagedave 4mo agoOf course it can. That's writing.
- scubbo 4mo agoThere are plenty of valid criticisms of the article, but this isn't one of them. I'd be embarrassed to call myself a fan of Pratchett while failing to recognize dramatic anthropomorphization (indeed, Pratchett was where teenaged-me first learned the word)
- eplatzek 4mo agoI fully disagree. This felt human.
- st3phvee 4mo agoThe author admitted to using AI.