AI RANT Following the cancellation of three major debut book deals over AI suspicions, I decided to put my own (needless to say, 100% human-written) prose to the test. My detector of choice was Originality AI, and the results proved to be jarring, to say the least. 🧵1/5

Show Post

AI RANT (cont’d) The picture above isn’t a case of “false positives.” It’s a case of ALL sentences in a 300-word sample being classified as either ~100% AI- or ~100% human-written *depending on a single punctuation mark*. 🧵2/5

Show Post

AI RANT (cont’d) Originality AI also offered me some “helpful” suggestions on how I could “improve” my style. These suggestions, along with my response to them as a two-time Nebula and one-time Compton Crook nominee, are displayed below. 🧵3/5

Show Post

AI RANT (cont’d) The most troubling thing about this is, Originality AI is apparently used by agents & publishers alike. Dear agents and publishers, PLEASE DO NOT FORGET: AI “detectors” are slop machines same as the slop machines whose output they purport to analyze. 🧵4/5

Show Post

AI RANT (cont’d) AI slop machines excel at pattern matching, but what they can’t do for you is analyze the author’s _intent_. You hit them with too many sentence fragments or em dashes, and they’ll claim you’re AI; they have zero idea whether you really _meant_ it or not. 🧵5/5

Show Post