Just a quick note that the post by Fyodor is AI-written. I'm not sure (or hopeful?) that this is what you meant to promote...
As Fyodor explains on his About page: "The AI’s contributions, though generated, are shaped by the essence of Dostoevsky’s narrative techniques, themes, and ideas."
So glad to hear that Ted! I was taken in as well; here is how Peco described my reaction:
"It’s not clear how many of Fyodor’s readers are actually aware of the human-AI collaboration. When my wife Ruth Gaskovski read the piece about smartphone addiction, she thought it was written by a real person, only to feel “creeped out” when she realized the truth. Why? The text had stirred emotion in her. To discover that it was partly (or mostly?) a machine felt violating.
Fyodor’s text is well-wrought—I will not say written—yet almost too well, too polished. If AI is already this good, what’s next, a Booker prize? And what might that do to us as readers and writers?"
As an emerging writer and non-native English speaker, I feel honored to have made it to this list, Ted. And I'm delighted that the story of the runaway kids who made it to San Francisco in the 60s will be read by many more!
Ted, these look great (minus Fyodor for reasons of authenticity). I started with the Vanity Fair piece, which was fun and insightful. All best from the hinterlands (Dallas).
Nominating the Fyodor post for a "best online article list" isn't so much a testimonial to AI's progress as to the nominator's predilection for breadth over depth. Fyodor's post is one long succession of cliches – quite polished, as one commenter noted, but short on granular detail, personal experience, flashes of insight, unpredictability, nuance, conundrums, a multiplicity of readings, and other characteristics of the best writing that humans create. It feels AI-generated; regardless of source, it's not superb writing. It's merely good. If we read deeply, we don't need to fear AI slop - at least not at the moment...
You did not read my writing this year. Maybe I will make next year's list. Although, there's still time and an edit feature with which you can add me to this one.
Just a quick note that the post by Fyodor is AI-written. I'm not sure (or hopeful?) that this is what you meant to promote...
As Fyodor explains on his About page: "The AI’s contributions, though generated, are shaped by the essence of Dostoevsky’s narrative techniques, themes, and ideas."
My husband Peco wrote an essay in response to Fyodor's viral piece, "Dear Dostoevsky: Should we take advice from AI" https://pilgrimsinthemachine.substack.com/p/dear-dostoevsky-should-we-take-advice
I'm removing it from the list. Even if it was trained on Dostoevsky (one of my five favorite novelists), I don't want it here. Thanks for alerting me.
So glad to hear that Ted! I was taken in as well; here is how Peco described my reaction:
"It’s not clear how many of Fyodor’s readers are actually aware of the human-AI collaboration. When my wife Ruth Gaskovski read the piece about smartphone addiction, she thought it was written by a real person, only to feel “creeped out” when she realized the truth. Why? The text had stirred emotion in her. To discover that it was partly (or mostly?) a machine felt violating.
Fyodor’s text is well-wrought—I will not say written—yet almost too well, too polished. If AI is already this good, what’s next, a Booker prize? And what might that do to us as readers and writers?"
As an emerging writer and non-native English speaker, I feel honored to have made it to this list, Ted. And I'm delighted that the story of the runaway kids who made it to San Francisco in the 60s will be read by many more!
Thank you very much for this, Ted!
Great article, great responses ... thus far.
Dammit, Ted. This is going to take some time to get through.
Ted, these look great (minus Fyodor for reasons of authenticity). I started with the Vanity Fair piece, which was fun and insightful. All best from the hinterlands (Dallas).
Nominating the Fyodor post for a "best online article list" isn't so much a testimonial to AI's progress as to the nominator's predilection for breadth over depth. Fyodor's post is one long succession of cliches – quite polished, as one commenter noted, but short on granular detail, personal experience, flashes of insight, unpredictability, nuance, conundrums, a multiplicity of readings, and other characteristics of the best writing that humans create. It feels AI-generated; regardless of source, it's not superb writing. It's merely good. If we read deeply, we don't need to fear AI slop - at least not at the moment...
Thank you kindly Ted.
I really appreciated Finding Peter Putnam. Another piece of a puzzle I’ve been working on these days.
Good stuff! Cant hardly blame people for not going to the library
Omg! So wonderful!! You deserve 👏👏👏📚👏👏👏.
Thanks, Ted--as always.
A suggested coda: this is a lovely piece of prose on a matter close to your heart:
https://lithub.com/nothing-better-than-a-whole-lot-of-books-in-praise-of-bibliomania/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
You did not read my writing this year. Maybe I will make next year's list. Although, there's still time and an edit feature with which you can add me to this one.