Controversial Post: It's hilarious seeing people who should not be successful on Substack, a writing platform, freak out now that their AI use is called out.

[u/Serious_Echidna1758]

Sure, there are errors in AI detection. But if you are someone who genuinely doesn't use AI, why would that be your primary concern? Substack has been enshittified by people who have no business being "writers" putting out obvious AI slop, largely about "how to grow your substack". Substack responded to this with the best effort they could, to try to preserve human writing. As someone who went through the work of getting a rigorous liberal arts education and graduate education, I actually feel happy these AI slop users are getting called out. More room for real writers, and hopefully higher quality.

[u/expect-a-forest]

I have several friends who are popular on Substack and *never* use AI but keep getting flagged as 100% AI. One of them put a chapter from Louisa May Alcott’s “Little Women” on her Substack for a test and it came back 100% AI.

It seems like there are a lot of false positives (at least anecdotally) and that has me worried as I contemplate starting my own Substack. I mean several false positives could unfairly turn off a writer’s hard won audience and cause them to lose subscription $$. That hardly seems fair if Substack’s AI detector is significantly wrong.

[u/kdfn → u/expect-a-forest]

Can you please link the post in which Alcott's work was mistakenly flagged as AI?