i was as surprised as you are!

we have learned absolutely nothing.

becsuse it’s an ethical question, we require a human subject with whom to attach authorship to.

but, i like your point and take comfort in it. i really do see value in what the machine hath wrought with my work.

ah, super interesting. thinking about the ways in which the shifts in how we viewed The Text in mid 20th c. changed how we understood readership now might parallel this shift on how we understand authorship (ethical engagement with AI requiring a kind of ownership over newly created text).

ah, that contest always makes me happy! (i should have caught the joke, AI matters have broke my sense of humor!)

then again, i guess you are throwing that cold water on me. time for my long ass cold plunge, eh?

but if there actually is value added in the interpretive dance…is it entirely bad? i’m almost entirely a techno pessimist these days, but i also wonder if there are moments for grabbing some part of the baby as we hurl the bathwater back into the ocean…

and now i feel like i need a shower for being pro AI in terms of summarizing complex ideas into digestible bite sized bits. or is this finally a good outcome?

SOMEONE VALIDATE MY FEELINGS OR DUMP COLD WATER OVER MY HEAD PLEEZ

the humiliation is that some folks in this country elected someone that ignorant.

honored beyond words.

also, hi hi!