if you're using AI regularly to generate text/presentations that you intend to use persuasively i don't think i can trust a single thing you say. Where does the AI end and the human begin?

I think this is why im so against AI generated commit messages especially if the code was written by a human, you wrote the code so you should be able to demonstrate that you understand what the change does and why.

If you're deferring that to an AI and you made a subtle logic error that it decides to justify for you suddenly we have obfuscated our own fucking zero days. Good luck finding the bug if the commit message describes the error as if it was intentional.

For general text, if you start with the conclusion and let the AI write the justification then there is no justification!!! Details matter, having a paper trail for decision making matters.

I wonder how many executives will escape the consequences of their white collar crimes by blaming AI.

AI zombification is coming and it's going to create a distinct difference in communication styles between those who do and don't use it, honestly that point is already here.

And we're gonna find out yet again that marx was right when it becomes clear that AI usage correlates with class lines.