I much prefer admission to hiding it. It lets you easily see who doesn’t deserve your time

While that might work great on the individual level for a little while, it's unfortunately not how normalized taboos seem to work long-term. You're just going to see more and more people who don't deserve your time until you're wanting for anyone who actually does.

This has been mentioned before, but I can see the benefit in having curated webrings and similar listings. Where people can verify the content is not LLM generated.

As soon as that becomes effective, you'll have dozens of SEO sites and experts giving seminars on "How to get your LLM-generated website into curated webrings." An entire cottage industry will spring up for the purposes of corrupting legitimate webrings and/or creating fake astroturf webrings that claim to be curated.

Oh, what about the petty fights between different webrings accusing each other of using AI generated content....

Reminds me of the early days of the web.

> You're just going to see more and more people who don't deserve your time until you're wanting for anyone who actually does.

I can see it, perhaps positively, investing far less importance and effort into online things. With admittedly a lot of optimism, I could see it leading to a resurgent arts and crafts movement, or a renewed importance put on hand-made things. People say "touch grass"; maybe AI will make people "touch crafts" (bad joke, I know).

That's boasting, not admission

I think it depends on the context. I think there's artistic cases for it, for example I've played around with using AI tools to extract speech from its background music for use in further (non AI-based) music which I don't think is an unethical thing to do.

It's already like this for creative communities in things like illustration and writing. You will (rightly) get ostracized and blocked by your peers for using AI. It's a signal for poor quality for most people in those spaces.

Definitely interesting to see the different culture in tech and programming since programmers are so used to sharing code with things like open source. I think programmers should be more skeptical about this bullshit, but one could make the argument that having a more flexible view of intellectual property is more computer native since computers are really just copying machines. Imo, we need to have a conversation about skills development because while art and writing accept that doing the work is how you get better, duplicating knowledge by hand in programming can be seen as a waste of time. We should really push back on that attitude though or we'll end up with a glut of people in the industry who don't understand what's under all the abstractions.