Author Defends AI Writing With 3,000-Word Essay as Tool, Not Replacement

2 articles · Updated · O'Reilly Media · Aug 27

A 3,000-word essay argues AI should be treated as a creative medium like photography or film, with the author saying human intention and editing—not raw generation—determine whether the result is art.
Using one example, the writer says a 300-word prompt became a 660-word AI draft and ultimately an essay containing only 40 to 50 AI-supplied words, after fact-checking, restructuring and extensive rewriting.
The case leans on history and debate: early critics said photography threatened art, while writer Ted Chiang argues good work comes from many choices; the author counters that prompts can embody years of thought and still require craft.
Routine uses such as meeting notes, interview takeaways and research assistance are presented as productivity gains, while unedited "AI slop" and automated personal messages are still condemned as deceptive or low-quality.
The broader claim is that AI writing remains in an early "filmed stage plays" phase, and that stronger norms and tools could reward concentrated effort rather than replace writers outright.