Critics warn of an AI rewriting arms race.
Positive users express excitement about trying Peter Yang's anti-slop workflow, while negative users call the detector worthless and easily bypassed by prompts.
No Digg Deeper questions have been answered for this story yet.
okay the funniest outcome here would be that everyone use ai to write, then uses even more ai to rewrite it until it passes the detector. making it sound even worse than the real slop but now with an ai approved seal for human writing lol (which is hilarious in itself). the financial incentive makes that at least somewhat inevitable. which means instead of reducing slop, substack could accidentally create an arms race that produces even more of it. the other possibility is even funnier imagine if the detector reveals that a lot of supposedly human writing is indistinguishable from ai slop cuz it was already bad. either way very interested in seeing how this plays out.. fun times to be alive.
NEW: Substack launches an AI-detection feature, allowing users to scan articles & comments for “AI slop.”
Substack just shipped AI slop detection to protect readers and featured my writing as an example of how to use AI to edit without pumping out slop. Basically, I work with AI during the middle 50% of my writing process: → First 25%: I voice dictate or write a rough draft without AI. → Middle 50%: I use AI and my /no-ai-slop skill to fix grammar, improve clarity, and test my arguments. → Last 25%: I go through the piece line by line and edit it manually. The difference between pumping out slop and making something you’re proud of is giving a damn and staying in the driver’s seat throughout this 25/50/25 process. 📌 More here: https://creatoreconomy.so/p/use-my-no-ai-slop-skill-to-remove-20-ai-slop-patterns
I’m sick of reading AI slop, so today I’m open-sourcing my /no-ai-slop skill that removes 20+ slop patterns from any piece of writing. 📌 Get the free skill here: https://github.com/petergyang/no-ai-slop If you find it useful, please consider starring the repo so more people can find it. Why I built the skill: I use AI to edit my writing because it helps me fix spelling, grammar, and clarity. But even the best models keep producing the same slop that this skill removes: → Binary contrasts: “It’s not X. It’s Y.” → Throat-clearing openers: “Here’s what nobody tells you.” → Fake-profound endings: “The future isn’t coming. It’s already here.” Use this skill responsibly. I always write a first draft manually before iterating with AI on edits and I make sure to do another manual pass at the end as well. That’s in contrast to using AI to automate pumping out slop end-to-end. 📌 Read my full post for more on how I try to use AI responsibly to edit without giving into the dark side: https://creatoreconomy.so/p/use-my-no-ai-slop-skill-to-remove-20-ai-slop-patterns
@signulll yeah i've now completely swung back around on this especially with sending prospecting/sales related emails... the barometer should just be good v bad instead of ai v not...? get this ai writing out of here so i can get back to reading my copy and pasted wikipedia prose.
@sriramkiron i mean anything is possible in ai. especially this.
@signulll this is how we submitted all of our projects, reports, researchs etc in our post grad, all of prof's softwares failed to detect the AI slop
@signulll My take is most of us are adopting AI phrasing/tics even if we don’t notice it. A lot of human writing has become LLM-like writing
@petergyang Even with the manual last pass, does the skill ever flag something that actually sounds like you?
@signulll It's a big help as Substack is where I post long essays that compete with genAI content. My hope is that you can give my Substack url to an AI and it will give you a book report summary, but the meat and potatoes will always be written by me.
@signulll I doubt human writing could be read as ai slop unless the person was explicitly trying because human writing is bad in ways ai writing isn’t (similar to how human code has bugs that current AI would never really make)
@noamchirps @signulll We believe that this document is fully human-written https://www.pangram.com/history/e479f660-8364-438e-84a4-2d71d22c69dd
@signulll AI was trained on real writing so now humans have to learn a new way of writing to evade Ai dragnets, so writing styles will change accordingly.
@aelshimy_ Yes sometimes it makes a mistake and changes my writing style but then I added explicit instructions to not do this and it's better now.
@petergyang Congrats on the shout out! Your work flow is very similar to mine. I had my own anti slop skill but I’m excited to try yours !
@signulll love how this backfires in the most predictable way
@petergyang The slop detector flags the output. The actual fix is caring enough to write the hard part yourself. Enterprise teams keep buying the former.
@signulll I think the most ironic part is that ppl are wholesale outsourcing their decision making to a *checks notes* AI detection system.
@signulll pangram has stated before that it's possible to train a model using their output to avoid pangram detection would not be good for society...