To be presented as a talk track to the Gettysburg Powerpoint: https://norvig.com/Gettysburg/

>The world won't remember our status updates, but it will never forget their execution.

PMs btfo

Stumbles here and there but

> We’ve gathered here to dedicate a portion of this space as a final resting place for the team members who gave everything to ensure the brand could live on. It’s the right strategic move.

Brilliant.

This is great. My only gripe is that it's still way too smart compared to most of the stuff I see on LinkedIn. If it had wrapped up with a "it's not X, it's Y", would've been perfect.

It also doesn't have enough "not" contrasts. "Not to remember what we say here, but to remember what was done here."

Then again maybe the quality of Lincoln's literacy defies it.

> Then again maybe the quality of Lincoln's literacy defies it.

I think so. My first thought reading this output is that I should ask the LLM to first write in the style of Lincoln and then slightly modernize the prose.

Everybody else looks for em dashes. For me that is the number 1 tell of AI.

Anybody else being annoyed by all this focus on em-dash use to detect AI? In no time, the bad guys will tell their BS machines to avoid em-dashes and "it's not X it's Y" and whatever else people use as "tell-tale signs" and eventually the training data will have picked up on that too. And people who genuinely use em-dashes for taste reasons or are otherwise using expressions considered typical for AI are getting a bad rep.

This is all just demonstrating the helplessness that's coming to our society w.r.t. dealing with gen AI output. Looking for em-dashes is not the solution and distracts from actually having to deal with the problem. (Which is not a technical but a social one. You can't solve it with tech.)

This is turning out to be a huge issue for me as my frequent use of em-dashes makes my remarks trigger people effectively disrupting attempts to communicate. Maybe my communication needs to change or maybe these objections are yet another red flag to watch for.

Just use -.

Why be wrong on purpose to placate people who are wrong out of ignorance?

It's often the solution.

I keep reading about students are learning to intentionally write worse so that it doesn't get flagged as AI-generated. I think it's a systemic problem that won't be solved in the short term, unfortunately.

It's hilarious that em dashes and "it's not X; it's Y" and other trivial things are the best way for humans to spot AI now. Like if AI robots infiltrated us, at first we'd be like "ooh, he has long ears, he's a robot". And after a while the robots will learn to keep their ears shorter. Then what? When we're out of tell-tale signs?

> Anybody else being annoyed by all this focus on em-dash use to detect AI?

Yes, the “AI detectives” can be quite annoying, as the comments are always the same. No substance, just “has X, it’s AI”. The em-dashes detectives tend to be the worse, because they often refuse to understand that em-dashes are actually trivial to type (depending on OS) and that people have been using them on purpose since before LLMs.

Mind you, using em-dashes as one signal to reinforce what you already perceive as LLM writing is valid, it’s only annoying when it’s used as the sole or principal indicator.

"all men are created equal."

I love that this is in quotes.

Increasingly, this is the case, though.

What does it mean for two people to be "equal"? Obviously, it cannot mean they are equal in strength and in quality. There are people who are excellent, and excellent in many ways, and people who are mediocre or poor in quality in many ways. People are also morally diverse, ranging from the virtuous and the saintly to the thuggish and the depraved.

No, this equality is an equality of basic human dignity. It rests with human nature: our dignity is rooted in our rationality and freedom to make chose. Incidentally, this is also the basis for human rights.

Historically, however, most cultures did not believe in human equality or equality of dignity. You only see that with a robust account of natural law and in its fullness within the Imago Dei; living up to it is another matter. Liberalism [0], as an offshoot of this tradition, takes for granted this notion, but when pressed, it has trouble offering justification. That's why political appeals to equality now appear more frantic and strident. When there is an underlying uneasiness about the rational basis of one's convictions, this often transmutes into emotional defensiveness. But mere assertion has little force. Over time, emotion and pure assertion does not maintain its grip, which makes these quotes that much more interesting.

[0] Another fun case are materialists who simultaneously believe in equality. If there is anything that would dash the very notion of equality, it is materialism.

It is literally a quotation from an earlier piece of writing...

But it's not a quote in the input text, so it's very funny that the output introduces quotes around it like they were scare quotes.

This made me laugh out loud.

stating questions as fact, love it.

This literally reads like Erlich from Silicon Valley.

This is hilarious but... and I can't believe Im actually giving critique here... but a modern day, LinkedIn version would be couched in words like "exceedingly complex", "multi-domain", "system of systems", etc.

But the whole thing is brilliant. And #GrowthMindset at the end is absolute gold.