Makes sense, lack of editors is why all my essays in high school weren’t any good either

It's crossed my mind that a couple of a certain class of typos in a document has become a signal of authenticity. It's only a matter of time* before we see prompting or even manual editing adapt to falsify that signal.

* before this comment gets a single upvote, somebody will have vibe-coded this

I think they're pointing out that the sentence is symmetric.

"That product saw little adoption" - "and pretty much languished."

"privacy concerns" - "about privacy"

I think it boils down to you get what you pay for. If information is free, it will become same as noise.

The article also misspelled her last name.

The AI would, hands down, write a better sentence if you compared the output quality of an author writing 10,000 words per day with an AI writing 10,000 words per day. Or make the AI write 100,000 words per day, it could write sentences better than that 24/7 without breaking a sweat, while the human would literally be incapable of achieving this goal.

But if you gave both a month to write the best 400 word article they could possibly generate on a particular subject, the human author would dominate. Give them time to make a few drafts, to research and think and talk to people, to edit and reorganize and restart and rehearse, and they'll produce something that's worth being read and re-read and considered thoughtfully by thousands of people.

The problem is that the journalism industry has become optimized to generate content to be skimmed by a few people and read by thousands of bots.

Poor style gives a sense of character and authenticity.