Squashed commit of the following: commit 374f11cf61378b109d171fc6e2b4c93bad099d21 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Mon Mar 4 23:25:53 2024 -0500 finish post commit f0164e4ee203115e1c8e85b10ac472b08993063f Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Mon Mar 4 01:00:22 2024 -0500 march progress commit f71d1ea7a289e5c6ee47241a2e944395d7cacfb2 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Mon Mar 4 00:38:52 2024 -0500 march progress commit 4b0c67be3a34a9b0cc12d324a2064dc8a5d52d16 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Sun Mar 3 23:16:42 2024 -0500 march progress commit e8e07658b2a0c8c54177224648f28951e88afb15 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Sat Mar 2 23:11:48 2024 -0500 improved arcus commit 09636c0c606e8497c6e9f6b92842ce3cbbcc0710 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Thu Feb 29 22:21:06 2024 -0500 Arcus commit 2f055e02e78eb9f1116a035c6e733cdc9012dbfe Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Wed Feb 28 15:58:37 2024 -0500 Post update commit 4bbfffe52a5a007bf48b733791bbfca77e4b0cf0 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Tue Feb 27 13:55:02 2024 -0500 Update date commit 21ebf24f05c07637e832851388b545e45707a32d Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Tue Feb 27 12:49:51 2024 -0500 post notes commit 64ec1bfbf0096813a84909d88a5ccccf5a076198 Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Wed Feb 21 13:56:21 2024 -0500 add docker-compose systemd commit fcffb11087bef0afcc51a3c3bc5f16e935e2ae4c Author: David Eisinger <david.eisinger@gmail.com> Date: Tue Feb 20 23:44:06 2024 -0500 start march dispatch
138 lines
7.8 KiB
Plaintext
138 lines
7.8 KiB
Plaintext
What’s the fun in writing on the internet anymore?
|
||
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
|
||
You are reading some words on the internet.
|
||
|
||
Think about all the things you could do with these words.
|
||
|
||
You could copy and paste this article into ChatGPT and say, “Please rewrite and
|
||
paraphrase this blog post in such a way as to keep its main points and
|
||
observations, but substantively reconfigure the text to make the original
|
||
version undetectable.” And then, just like that, you have content for your own
|
||
blog. So easy.
|
||
|
||
Or you could just copy the contents of this page and paste it into a site like
|
||
plagiarism-remover.com so you could, as advertised, “Easily Convert Your
|
||
Plagiarism article Into Plagiarism Free article.” Or you could use Spinbot. Or
|
||
Jasper. Or QuillBot. Or Paraphraser. And so on.
|
||
|
||
You can now spin up [1]new, “original” articles faster and easier than even
|
||
reading the originals. This is a dizzying and dumbfounding new reality, when
|
||
you stop and think about it: automated plagiarism is now more efficient than
|
||
reading itself.
|
||
|
||
All the same, if you want to skip the whole paraphrase/spin step, you could
|
||
instead [2]copy and paste this article verbatim into a newsletter served up
|
||
behind a paywall. This strategy drastically reduces the odds that it will be
|
||
recognized as plagiarism on the open web. And, hey, why not make a few extra
|
||
bucks? (Perhaps ironically, turbo-charged content spinning is so pervasive that
|
||
[3]evermore sites require user logins just to access content. This seems
|
||
vicious: repurposing content engenders the proliferation of walled gardens and
|
||
walled gardens, in turn, engenders the proliferation of repurposed content.)
|
||
|
||
In summary, it feels like the fate of words on the internet is to be
|
||
paraphrased. Emerging tools like [4]Perplexity.ai respond to quiries with
|
||
fulsome answers that do not require users to even click off the site. In other
|
||
words, search itself is becoming the delivery of paraphrase and summary. Waning
|
||
are the days of sifting through “search results” to find a specific source.
|
||
Henceforth, digital words are little more than raw data to be crunched,
|
||
processed, and served up by third-party intermediaries.
|
||
|
||
The “moral rights” of the author. Copyright. Attribution. We have grown to
|
||
assume these concepts as givens, but they are rapidly sliding into practical
|
||
irrelevance in the age of AI and paywalls. To put any thoughtful labour into
|
||
crafting words online today is to watch them get sucked up, repurposed, and
|
||
often monetized by someone else. It feels a bit like a digital wasteland;
|
||
overrun with pirates, replete with armies of robots regurgitating everything
|
||
into a gooey cocktail of digital sludge.
|
||
|
||
It is interesting to speculate about the future. It seems like people might
|
||
eventually grow skeptical about investing their personal creativity in such a
|
||
space, right? Will anyone bother writing on the internet when they know their
|
||
words will be pilfered and junkified? What happens to the craft of writing
|
||
itself when our de facto global platform for sharing text no longer reinforces
|
||
or recognizes the role or rights of authorship?
|
||
|
||
To ponder this question, we can look back. In some ways, today’s internet
|
||
evermore reminds of the world I encountered back in classical studies. There
|
||
are bits of papyrus and parchment are flying around everywhere. Some texts
|
||
claim attribution, some are anonymous, and a lot are pseudonymous—and you can’t
|
||
tease any of this apart with any certainty. There are competing manuscripts,
|
||
copies of copies, and significant “versioning issues” everywhere you look.
|
||
Ultimately, the credence and authority you give to any specific text typically
|
||
reflects the trust your community bestows on it. The only words that survive
|
||
are the ones that get copied. This all sounds strangely familiar, yes?
|
||
|
||
If you were lucky and wealthy enough to write in antiquity, your scribbles went
|
||
out into the world to completely unknown ends. Authorship, accompanied by
|
||
newfangled attributions of moral and legal entitlements, is not yet a refined
|
||
concept. Once you “release” the words, you categorically relinquish control of
|
||
them. And you are fully aware that the more clever and helpful your words are
|
||
to others, the more likely it is that future readers will attribute your words
|
||
to someone else.
|
||
|
||
Sic semper erat, et sic semper erit. The better your words, the more likely it
|
||
is that somebody will poach them. Somebody will probably “paraphrase” your work
|
||
beyond detection. Somebody will “republish” it as their “original.” Somebody
|
||
else will train their large language model on your text and serve it up without
|
||
citations or footnotes. To write on today’s internet and assume universal
|
||
respect for your “moral rights of authorship” is an act of grand delusion.
|
||
|
||
You might as well write anonymous papyrus fragments.
|
||
|
||
And this is the point.
|
||
|
||
None of this really matters.
|
||
|
||
Whether papyrus or the internet, humans doggedly write for influence, status,
|
||
wealth, conviction, and pleasure. But the so-called sanctity of “authorship” is
|
||
only a very recent idea. These “rights” of authorship are only true if they are
|
||
enforced. They are a kind of fiction that only make sense in occasional times,
|
||
places, and cultures. For the next chapter of the human experiment, I wonder if
|
||
“authorship” will again recede into the background, as it often seems to do in
|
||
times of disruptive changes in communication technology.
|
||
|
||
But the banishment of the author doesn’t mean writing ends. Writers still write
|
||
even when “authorship” functionally means nothing. And what they write still
|
||
influences their world, with or without the universe dutifully paying homage to
|
||
their bylines. In the long arcs of history, what is written typically goes on
|
||
to mean much more than who wrote it. The future, like today, is built on ideas,
|
||
not on the people who had them, because people die but ideas never stop
|
||
evolving.
|
||
|
||
And the future needs ideas—not auto-generated “summaries” of old ones.
|
||
|
||
So, what’s the fun of writing on the internet anymore? Well, if your aim is to
|
||
be respected as an author, there’s probably not much fun to be had here at all.
|
||
Don’t write online for fame and glory. Oblivion, obscurity and exploitation are
|
||
all but guaranteed. Write here because ideas matter, not authorship. Write here
|
||
because the more robots, pirates, and single-minded trolls swallow up
|
||
cyberspace, the more we need independent writing in order to think new thoughts
|
||
in the future — even if your words are getting dished up and plated by an
|
||
algorithm.
|
||
|
||
Those who write — those who add ideas instead of paraphrasing and regurgitating
|
||
them — inform the lexicology and mental corpus of how we think in the future.
|
||
Indeed, the point isn’t “being an author,” but contributing one’s perspective,
|
||
even if one’s personal identity is silenced, erased, and anonymized along the
|
||
way.
|
||
|
||
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
|
||
|
||
This post on [5]jamesshelley.com is copyright © 2024 by [6]James Shelley
|
||
Released under a [7]Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 license
|
||
|
||
Friday, February 16, 2024
|
||
|
||
|
||
References:
|
||
|
||
[1] https://slate.com/technology/2023/01/chat-gpt-openai-jasper-hugging-face-plagiarism-big-technology.html
|
||
[2] https://jamesshelley.com/blog/on-being-plagiarized.html
|
||
[3] https://www.niemanlab.org/2024/02/six-months-in-journalist-owned-tech-publication-404-media-is-profitable/
|
||
[4] https://www.perplexity.ai/search/google-search-results-ET4ll7tdT6axzwgifCC3Gw?s=c
|
||
[5] https://jamesshelley.com/
|
||
[6] https://jamesshelley.com/
|
||
[7] https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0
|