Periodic self-repetition: As a data librarian I can say that "AI" is not a matter of personal preference -- whether you like it or not, or whether you have found some use that you think is useful. It actively destroys organized knowledge, and therefore it actively destroys civilization.
Whenever someone looks for a human written text and can't find it because statistical near variants have been created and indexed, whenever "AI" "hallucinates" a reference, knowledge has been destroyed.
@richpuchalsky
AIs write bad books (and texts, etc.) -- incoherent mash-ups of existing human works, and eventually worse mash-ups of human and AI works. But how does the existence of a bad book destroy knowledge? The good books still exist.
The problem in my view is less bad AI books, and more bad indexes and catalogs, (i.e. search pages made by foolish search engine corporations), and the ignorant public's very much misplaced trust in those bad indexes.
Bad books have always been a majority. Remedies include:
Bibliographies from reputable sources.
Critics who sift through new and old works and offer considered opinions.
A cautious respect for bad ideas, which when applied instruct by negative example.
Recommendations from trusted sources, whether friends, rivals, authors modern or ancient, and teachers.
Stop using indexes that direct readers to slop.
Rich Puchalsky ⩜⃝
Oof
Ted Mielczarek