The article argued that traditional economic growth is unsustainable.
Users reacted negatively to the Piketty and Hickel anti-growth op-ed being flagged as AI-generated slop, insulting the authors' intelligence and calling the piece low-quality output.
If the article really is AI generated (Pangram has a <1% false positive rate) then I think the Guardian's editorial code requires it to signal this to its readers, and probably issue a correction for not having run one in the first place. I have emailed their readers' editor.
@s8mb Oh maaaaaan, I didn’t even read it bc I rolled my eyes too hard at the headline, wish I had so I could’ve been first to realize it was slop
@s8mb Well, they're clearly lacking in the naturally occurring kind
@s8mb I’d be a bit more sceptical of the accuracy of the GenAi detected.
@s8mb Actually, Sam, I really do feel you should stop applauding and start working on your grovelling apology prior to withdrawing from public life forever.
@s8mb Oh dear.
@s8mb Wasn't aware he was an economist
@s8mb Never tried pangram before, quite glad to find my prose is 100% human!
@s8mb Schutter et al*