I don't care if this makes me a dinosaur. If I found out that a writer had used a solitary line of AI I would never read them again. If I thought someone had used AI in an email to me, I would never respond or indeed respect them again.

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:q7mzefsqqfjosq43isvpa4cm/post/3migsu76mqs22
AI is a genuinely useful research tool, especially now Google is so useless. I use it to help research all sorts of things and then ask for the sourcing so it can be independently verified. That's all very helpful. But the use of it for the creative work itself is a red line.
This distinction between research & writing tool is crucial, for journalism at least. That seems to me utterly intuitive and obvious. It's excessive to criticise its use in research, as long as it is carefully deployed, and barbaric to advocate its use in writing, no matter how it is deployed.
The people who so obviously have it writing their LinkedIn comments are like a whole level beyond of what the fuck—
like bro it’s LinkedIn what are you doing so much for and somehow also so little
@iandunt.bsky.social "If someone can't be bothered to write it, why should I bother to read it".