Hm, Andros I do have my doubts - I know that you are a proponent of generative AI. We had a discussion over your outspoken opposition to
https://human-emacs.org/.
I also know that you are an excellent writer/thinker, even prior to the advent of generative AI.
I'm in two minds here, and don't want to insinuate that you are outright lying, but I do believe your workflow relies on generative AI.
There is value in disclosing how you use generative AI to help you write articles. See https://www.bydamo.la/p/ai-manifesto or https://sive.rs/ai.
If you do use generative AI, may I suggest that you review the choice of licence:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
> NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
If you do use generative AI, it feels hypocritical to use this licence while using a technology that essentially tries to circumvent the copyright issue by remixing, transforming and building upon the material it has ingested.
I also know that you are an excellent writer/thinker, even prior to the advent of generative AI.
I'm in two minds here, and don't want to insinuate that you are outright lying, but I do believe your workflow relies on generative AI.
There is value in disclosing how you use generative AI to help you write articles. See https://www.bydamo.la/p/ai-manifesto or https://sive.rs/ai.
If you do use generative AI, may I suggest that you review the choice of licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
> NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
If you do use generative AI, it feels hypocritical to use this licence while using a technology that essentially tries to circumvent the copyright issue by remixing, transforming and building upon the material it has ingested.