I skimmed this criticism of Pokimane and got to the fourth paragraph before I realized I was reading a chatGPT output. The emdashes are the most obvious giveaway, but the constant restatements and trouble with building conclusions are also clear tells, if a little more subtle.
In this case I agree overall with the post, but GPT (or grok - they all write the same) argued the point for the poster and did a mediocre job overall, especially for a post with 3M views. More troubling is that the guy insists he wrote the whole thing himself, which has apparently fooled thousands of people. He's far from the only one, either. It's not uncommon to see people using AI to respond to an argument.
I don't know where this is going. AI is a powerful force multiplier, but if more and more people outsource their writing to it, we will eventually get to a soft version of dead internet theory where real people are volleying back and forth with GPT responses but don't fully understand what they're saying to each other. Scammers and grifters will almost be indistinguishable, superficially. I'm surprised the Indian contingent hasn't figured out how to use GPT outputs en masse, but I'm sure it's coming.
The only hope is that people will develop enough AI literacy to recognize automated content. We'll see if this happens.
Yes, this is another important point. People keep saying you can use AI to detect if an image has been generated by AI, for instance, but it's false. Given enough time, it will be impossible to tell if something is true or not. This will, in turn, become an impossible situation for the justice system, where you can basically generate any kind of proof you want to put someone in jail, and no one will be able to determine if the proof are just extremely well-made fake or not.
All in all, AI is terrible. Until we have answers to those solutions, humanity should not play with AIs at all, but of course that won't stop anyone, the power gain is just too much.