Artificial intelligence never thinks, decides, or has opinions for me. I use AI the way it’s actually made to be used: to do editing or research, so I can do the writing.
AI is leverage. Anyone who doesn’t use it will eventually be outrun by a competitor who’s faster, cheaper, and easier to deal with.
There’s plenty of proof in the past for businesses that rejected new technology and failed. History repeats itself for those blind enough not to see it.
“We didn’t do anything wrong, but somehow we lost,” said the Nokia CEO on the announcement of the company’s acquisition by Microsoft.
And that’s the exact problem: they didn’t do anything. At all.
So yes, I believe everyone should understand the use of AI, the right way.
Used lazily, AI speaks instead of you, and readers feel it in two words. Used properly, it gets you ahead in the game faster. Here is one person’s view on it, about Substack now checking for AI content, which was announced last week:
There are publications on Substack who are making tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars from their subscribers. Many of the largest publications on Substack have teams behind them: editors, marketers, assistants, or colleagues to bounce ideas off. They have access to professional support throughout the writing and publishing process.
Long before AI existed, writers with more resources had advantages. They could hire editors, writing coaches, researchers, proofreaders, translators, virtual assistants, marketers, and publishers. None of that was considered cheating. It was simply part of having access to professional support.
People come to writing with very different circumstances and very different levels of support. Some writers have dyslexia and appreciate help catching spelling mistakes or improving sentence structure. Others have ADHD and use AI to help organize their thoughts or keep a draft focused. Some are building a publication alongside a full-time job or raising young children and simply can’t afford to hire an editor.
For writers whose first language isn’t English, AI has opened doors that might otherwise have remained closed, allowing them to share their ideas with a much wider audience without being judged primarily on their grammar rather than the quality of their thinking. And many writers simply don’t have anyone else to read, analyze and discuss their work before they publish it. In my opinion, what matters isn’t whether AI touched the process, it’s whether the finished work reflects genuine thought, care, and something worth saying. I’d much rather see readers asking, “Did this article make me think?” than, “Did this paragraph score 30% AI?”
AI is far from perfect, but it can be helpful in leveling the playing field for those who don’t have a team of human support. - Adrienne J Clarke
And another writer, answering concerns about the criticism of AI in general:
Throughout history, people have often debated whether a new technology changes the meaning of a craft:
The printing press changed who could publish. Cameras changed painting and portraiture. Word processors changed writing. Digital editing changed photography and music. The internet changed how knowledge is shared.
At some point, asking whether someone used AI may become like asking whether a writer used spell check or a musician used digital recording software. What’s probably more important is:
Did the person have something meaningful to say? Did they bring their own perspective and experience? Did they use the tool thoughtfully? Did the final work connect with another human being? - Dave Tsang
Substack knows the difference too. Chris Best wrote it in the announcement: they use AI at Substack all the time, for software, research, and product features. “Substack is fighting slop, not the use of AI”, two very different problems.
Think back on this statement: “None of that was considered cheating. It was simply part of having access to professional support.” - You could say the same about horse trainers, who have staff, or amateur riders, who have professionals who train their horses for them. We don’t consider that cheating?
Slop is content nobody wrote, for nobody. Fire away at it, I say.
You can read another very good article about it HERE
I use AI a lot in draft stages, especially checking and researching, but I don’t produce slop.
And that’s what my new book is about: how horse people, of all people, can use AI as leverage without ever losing their voice, their experience, or the horse’s best interest.
Artificial intelligence is a tool that can help ordinary horse people reclaim the distance between themselves and the professionals who serve the industry, and allow professionals to serve ordinary horse people better.
Perhaps that is leveling the playing field.
Thank you for being part of this journey with me.
AI for Horse People is available now!
If it helps even one horse get better care because its person made a clearer decision, it’s done its job.
OR Click on the QR code.
And here is an excellent video on applications of AI and Tech already available.
These links have been provided to you so that you can read and relax, and stay up to date on interesting news, tips or curiosities. One can never stop learning.
Enjoy!
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.