Everywhere we turn, we’re told that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is either taking over our minds, the most efficient work assistant since desktop computers—or both things at once. It’s even become necessary in some circles to declare writing 100 percent human, so let me assure you that every word of this blog was put down by me and me alone.
Even without understanding how it works, I get that we can’t just ignore this quantum shift. So today I’m going to share my current workflow, along with some of what’s going on in the author/writing space. My only request is that all comments be 100 percent human-created—and, of course, respectful of others, even if they don’t share your views.
Detection
How do you tell whether content was created by a human? There are (of course) AI detection services that will rate a given story. I haven’t tried them out, though I’ve heard that my love of m-dashes might indicate AI-generated content to the algorithm.
At the other end of the automation scale, the Author’s Guild has created a Human Authored certification mark that works on the honor system. While I hope it is effective, I don’t (yet) see the value of adding it to my own work.
Slippery Slope
Any discussion about AI use by writers quickly devolves into nitpicking. I use online search tools and a transcription service, so I can no longer say that AI plays no part in my work flow. What I can promise is that I do all the actual writing myself, much the way we were taught in high school to put researched facts “into our own words” to avoid plagiarism.
Another place where AI helps many authors is apps that improve spelling and grammar, but those are not currently part of my work flow. (I’ve even heard of desperate email marketers who consciously add typos, just to prove how “human” they are.)
Speed and Acceleration
Books take me years to write, because even non-fiction stories (at least for this pantser) never take the most efficient path from Once Upon a Time to The End. Meanwhile, a properly prompted AI bot can churn out a story in seconds that some readers may find perfectly satisfying . . . And in the time it took me to finish this sentence, the bot has probably already made significant improvements in its voice and plot.
Not Going Away
All of this is only going to get less black and white in the days and years to come—as well as undoubtedly harder to avoid in both my own workflow and the greater world of writing. Based on early 2026 research, publishing expert Jane Friedman estimates that “the number of works with some percentage of AI-generated or AI-assisted text within their pages is approaching 25 to 50 percent for nonfiction in particular and may soon be the majority.” Wow! (There’s much more in her excellent post, My Concerns About the Authors Guild Human Authored Certification. She also offered a refreshing perspective ten months ago that stands up well: What AI Can’t Steal from You.)
Learning from Our Words
I haven’t even touched on a much larger issue: AI training itself on copyrighted (human) writing. Though there are several ongoing lawsuits, I don’t see any big-picture fix for this. My small-picture response is to try to minimize AI’s access to my own human-authored words.
What do you think: is AI taking over our minds, the most efficient work assistant since desktop computers, or both? Blow off a little steam in the comments below, because I read every single human-generated reply—and appreciate the spam filters that eliminate everything else. Meanwhile, you can safely assume that every blog post on this site was human-generated—no matter how many m-dashes you find.
Thanks for reading, and see you next Thursday.
Personally, I have found AI extremely helpful for streamlining research for my writing. What took me hours and hours in researching, stealing time from actual writing, I can now sift through in minutes. That said, I have a strict “Do not feed me lines!” rule when consulting AI for correcting syntax and tangled sentences.
…and I really appreciate your ‘human’ authorship!… (I do read your blogs even if I don’t comment.)
Bridget, thanks for the comment. Only yesterday (after this blog post was already scheduled) that I discovered the incredible reach and power of asking AI research questions… and then following up on any links/suggestions for further digging. Fortunately it was after I’d already dug deep into the topic myself (yes, taking many more hours than the AI version), so I could easily spot mistakes—and usually figure out where they came from.
Thanks for the “do not feed me lines!” prompt! I will be borrowing that one.
I’m neither a professional writer nor sailor, Carol, but I enjoy your weekly musings in part because I know that, no matter the topic, they’re created by a 100% Grade A Certifed Human. And that matters to me. AI is useful to spit out routine answers to basic questions I might pose, but I’ve found by experimenting that the results can depend on how a question is phrased. So, I don’t think the reliability component is there yet.
I guess I’m just wary of it on principle and I fear that, as I’ve read recently, it might one day play a major role in military decisions. Or, perhaps that news item was written by AI, hah!
Signed,
I, Robot
Larry, thanks for the kind words—and the chuckle at the signature!
Carol, Thanks for the column. As weary as I am of the topic (I’d rather talk about something fun like Heated Rivalry or the abundant use of em-dashes, also a fan), I think AI has clearly shown a valuable role in scientific applications. But when it comes to writing, I cannot be more appalled by its use and how easily so many writers offer themselves to it. My daughter, who is also a writer, put it this way: She said, “As far as I know we are the only animals who create art for the sake of creating art. When we give that creativity away to a machine, we are giving away our humanity.” I would add to that by saying that even though my career is one of professional writing, the process of research, interviewing, and writing from that work is part of what has made this profession worthwhile to me—a chance to deeply learn about so many things and people. Hand off that process or vital parts of it to a machine and again, for me that’s just diminishing the whole reason for being. Sure, it could make me faster and more efficient, but I am dead sick of this culture that insists on ever more speed at the sake of who we are and what we want to be. Showing my age here, but I’d happily be back in the era of no cell phones and slow but steady digging in libraries, interacting with other humans. There is fufillment in the process of discovery and creating something from that discovery, and the time it takes to do both. I’m also kind of stunned that writers seem to have little issue supporting a technology that is plagiarizing their own work and that of their colleagues and peers. Talk about eating your young. Last but definitely not least, I can’t in good conscience support a technology that is environmental rape. So I guess I will, like Galadriel, pass the test, diminish, and go into the west. But at least I’ll know that my words and my thoughts are my own.
Wendy, thanks to you (and your daughter) for all the pithy thoughts—especially your reminder that “There is fufillment in the process of discovery and creating something from that discovery, and the time it takes to do both.” I’m showing my age too, but I hope that younger writers still get / make the chance to wallow in “what if” and then take the non-efficient time to dig, often finding out something that might be totally different from their original question. Yes, this makes us human!
PS So glad you’re an M-dash fan. 🙂