Post by @markmetz@sfba.social

2026-05-02 03:31 UTC

“The irony of being forced to dumb down an essay about a story warning against the forced suppression of excellence was not lost on me. Or on my kid, who spent a frustrating afternoon removing words and testing sentences one at a time, trying to figure out what invisible tripwire the algorithm had set. The lesson the kid absorbed was clear: write less creatively, use simpler vocabulary, and don’t sound too good, because sounding good is now suspicious. At the time, I worried this was going to become a much bigger problem. That the fear of AI “cheating” would create a culture that actively punished good writing and pushed students toward mediocrity. I was hoping I’d be wrong about that. Turns out… I was not wrong.” https://www.techdirt.com/2026/03/06/were-training-students-to-write-worse-to-prove-theyre-not-robots-and-its-pushing-them-to-use-more-ai/

Replies (2)

@WanderingHuman@cosocial.ca 2026-05-02 17:51

@markmetz @AnnaAnthro Interesting. My recent experience stepping into the audiobook narration world has been the opposite. The AI slop that immediately jumps out is simplistic, formulaic, and bland. The good writing stands out - real sentences and paragraphs, occasional grammar mistakes (or creative license), substance, etc.

Open ##2005428
@gimulnautti@mastodon.green 2026-05-02 21:31

@markmetz ”No we won’t change, the students will have to change”. This is the same as with regard to (not) regulating social media. Or age verification. There shall be no change to the platforms, there shall be no change to the school curriculums or ways of testing. All mitigation will be borne by those with the least power, whatever the damage. It’s absolute #conservatism: The out-group will have to change, while the in-group is celebrated for doing nothing!

Open ##2005449