I follow a site/newsletter titled Plagiarism Today. Jonathan Bailey ( @plagiarismtoday \ @mastodon.world \ mastodon.world \ plagiarismtoday.com ) has managed this site for decades, and he knows his stuff about AI, copyright, and plagiarism. I receive many newsletters. His I read.

Recently he composed a piece entitled How Can I Prove That I’m Human?  As we all know, it has become challenging in schools and business to identify who is the legitimate author of a piece and how much AI they used to create it. The range can mean little more than using Grammarly to check grammar all the way to plugging a topic into ChatGpt and submitting the whole piece as your own.

When I receive article pitches for FundsforWriters, at least half are pure AI. The authors argue with me when I claim their piece reads like AI. They are insulted, they say. My response is that if the piece reads like it even might be AI, I don’t want it.

When I (or any other editor) purchases a piece, they want it to be original. They also want it to have a voice. They want a fresh idea presented in a fresh manner. If there is no voice, if the material sounds canned, or there isn’t unique personal experience written into the piece, they don’t want it.

This piece I posted the link to states that AI will slowly creep into human creativity, but I believe it’s still going to be a while before it performs optimally and can claim to be original in thought, word, and deed.

Just know, however, that if you ever get caught submitting AI, your name has a high probability of being forever black-listed with that publication and that editor. Speaking from experience.