Human Written Doc Stamp

At the explosion of ChatGPT, I was asked to add a profile for a project team pitch.

The kind of thing standard in fairly decent-ticket Proposals. Where a potted (glowing, natch) career history of the main deliverers revels in its own appendix.

Duly crafted, I added a line at the bottom of my contribution.

No AI was used in the writing of this.

Plenty of chatter followed.

I insisted it stayed. Some, not so sure. Others, slightly bewildered.

What's happened in the past three years or so?

Not a fat lot. You seen any such tag?

There are creative equivalents. In line with the worthy freelance #NoSpec movement. Yet if not outright author, AI is becoming an overwhelmingly contributory presence.

The weird thing is, right now such stamp remains largely unnecessary. As practically all AI delivered output neither has that authentic voice of the producer, nor the sparkle that makes it stand out as a winning, unique, deal clinching addition to that particular decision's canon.

Blanding is happening. And that is a success killer in our domain.

Even if you ask your chosen bot to produce away from the heavily plundered and sub-par mean, answers are not yet distinctive enough to put your name on.

Worse still, the edits, iterations and rework required to raise its bar is eerily reminiscent of the impact of office automation. Now every exec has spreadsheet, word processor or slideware on their desk, their admin time has soared, rather than the intended slash. With associated impact of supposed 'quality'. A slave to the automater.

You may have seen people posting their fresh Policy at their workplace for LLM content.

It's another shiny new thang. Ground moving quickly. Tech even quicker.

There feels a useful discipline in stating ʜᴜᴍᴀɴ ᴡʀɪᴛᴛᴇɴ atop your prose. I remember the trend taken from articles to place such as 5ᴍɪɴ ʀᴇᴀᴅ too. Short-lived, but a vibe. Having to label every piece you send out might be tricky.

Where its power might rise is when your competition doesn't do similar. Or when you do not show it.

This latter point harks back to what I still believe valid. Where you go collab mode with a prospect;

'let's see what AI says...'

Yet there's no shame now in producing something with footnote attributing it Bot-side. Especially with buyer-facing logic.

As an aside, I don't use AI to write my prose. It's from my real-life, not their skewed algo'd data, experience. On occasion that I have asked it about a topic, I have also posted explicitly so for comparative purpose. Often to expose what parts of the idea it misses.

No reason why we can't be equally confident with what we send prospects.