AI often makes writing worse. (Even if it makes it better)

The use of artificial intelligence in writing has become a widespread phenomenon, infiltrating prestigious newspapers and publishing houses. It is also found in the speeches of politicians, the homework of students, and even in LinkedIn posts, with 41% of longer ones reportedly utilizing this technology. When AI-generated content is scrutinized, it often reveals a lack of quality and emotional depth.

Users have become increasingly sensitive to AI-generated prose, with some even seeing it as a sign of intellectual obsolescence. The use of certain punctuation marks, like the em-dash, has become a telltale sign of AI involvement. While AI can produce content quickly and efficiently, it often falls short of the quality and emotional resonance found in human writing.

This has led to a phenomenon described as a "battle for our minds," where people are questioning the impact of AI on the English language. However, despite its shortcomings, AI-generated writing can be surprisingly good, as demonstrated by a blind tasting study where respondents rated AI-written content as higher quality and more engaging.

Yet, the use of AI in professional contexts, such as drafting political speeches or company announcements, can lead to negative consequences if the resulting content is problematic or misleading. This has sparked a debate about the moral implications of AI-generated content and the potential for "moral disgust" among readers. Ultimately, while AI may offer some advantages in terms of speed and efficiency, it seems unlikely to replace human writing entirely, at least not in the foreseeable future.

The human touch remains an essential aspect of writing, and for now, many people still prefer to read content created by humans.