Another Reason Not to Use "AI" for Your Writing
Another Reason Not to Use “AI” For Your Writing Posted on July 31, 2026 Posted by John Scalzi 20 Comments 1. Newer writers, just don't fucking use "AI" for anything, ever2. A hot and buzzy debut novel has been pulled from publishing and film/TV consideration over concerns that “AI” was used to make it.
- ▪Another Reason Not to Use “AI” For Your Writing Posted on July 31, 2026 Posted by John Scalzi 20 Comments 1.
- ▪Newer writers, just don't fucking use "AI" for anything, ever2.
- ▪A hot and buzzy debut novel has been pulled from publishing and film/TV consideration over concerns that “AI” was used to make it.
Hacker News (AI / LLM) files mainly under ai. We currently carry 3,061 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Whatever |
| Canonical URL | https://whatever.scalzi.com/2026/07/31/another-reason-not-to-use-ai-for-your-writing/ |
| Publication time | Fri, 31 Jul 2026 13:19:46 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-07-31T16:03:08.873Z |
| Last seen | 2026-07-31T16:03:08.873Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | X9gfqaOWiAXt · 1 stories |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Another Reason Not to Use “AI” For Your Writing Posted on July 31, 2026 Posted by John Scalzi 20 Comments 1. Newer writers, just don't fucking use "AI" for anything, ever2. How odd that being an established writer with a firm "no 'AI'" stance and ample pre-"AI" IP will become a definite competitive advantage over "new, hot, and possibly copyright compromised"deadline.com/2026/07/ai-q…— John Scalzi (@scalzi.com) 2026-07-31T10:56:05.029Z Back in February I did a long post about “AI” and why I wouldn’t use it for my own writing, and one of the reasons I gave was “the fact that ‘AI’-generated text is not copyrightable and I don’t want any issues of ownership clouding my work.” Well guess what? A hot and buzzy debut novel has been pulled from publishing and film/TV consideration over concerns…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Whatever.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Whatever
