Since the beginning of August I've written 3 novels. The first was 165,000, the second 77,000 and the one I completed today was 67,000. Anyone who can only write 500-1000 fiction on a good day would look at those figures and immediately assume I used AI.

Only I didn't. I write 7 days a week. I have over 30 novels in print. I type fast and, after 35 years in the biz, I know how to write clean copy while pantsing the plot 1-2 chapters ahead.

I've even tweeted my progress and word counts most days, and my writing software takes a backup of the scene I'm writing every 60 seconds, all time-stamped. I have all the proof I need to show I write every word myself.

But you can't put all that on the product page for your novels. So potential readers and other authors will look at my output of 3 books in 2 months and roll their eyes, assuming that kind of productivity has to be down to AI generation. Hopefully they'll stick around long enough to read the opening chapter before they get the pitchforks out.

Additional note: I just came back to writing after a 5 year break. There didn't seem much point writing fiction when people could churn out AI slop. But in the end I decided to have faith in the fans and readers of my various novels, and keep writing for them.

You don't know how to argue, or debate, or even answer comments, do you? Mindless passion is still mindless.

Try rebutting what I said. Can you do that for me? I'd appreciate it.

Corals have been regenerating themselves for several hundred million years. They don't need human help.

Corals have been around for several hundred million years. They survived the comet which killed off the dinosaurs. They survived ice ages and glaciations, the most recent being a 400-500 foot sea level rise just 10-15,000 years ago. They routinely bleach themselves while shifting populations of the critters which give them color.

We puny humans are no threat to corals.

I've been manually whitelisting JS on sites I use for well over a decade now. Some popular sites try to access great long lists of third-party domains, which tells me to either avoid those sites or just allow the primary and shrug if something doesn't work or load properly.

Used as a tool it's great. Used as a black box machine to generate a load of text on a subject the prompter has no knowledge of... terrible.

E.g. use it to lineedit your assignment and highlight errors. Don't get it to WRITE the assignment in the first place.

Otherwise you're throwing the contents of a garbage can into the oven and pressing a button that says 'pizza' - when you've never seen a pizza before, or tasted one.

Let me be perfectly clear about this: I am insulting you. I am calling you out as either being such a plonk that you keep old copies of People magazine around just in case ... or you are such a plonk that you google and select the answer you want.

Either way, you are a plonk. Your memory is reliable and truthful, mine is full of lies.

Yah, right, like I keep sources of everything I remember from 30 years ago. Uh huh. You of course, being perfect, do keep such sources, instead of just googling and reporting the results which confirm your own bias.

Lots of inventions were unasked-for until they were invented.

No we have not. That's another cherry picked date comparison. Corals have been bleaching and repopulating themselves for several hundred million years.

That's not how it was reported at the time, and I have no reason to trust People magazine.

If you were an anti-alarmist, you'd be crowing this shows sea levels dropping.

For another indication of how sloppy sea level rise claims are, the alarmists published a list of sea level changes along the US Atlantic coast, and funny thing, they differed considerably, as if the ocean were rising more in some places than others. The alternative explanation of sinking land levels was pooh poohed as climate denialism. But another funny thing: California's central valley was once reported as having sunk 22 feet since the gold rush days 150 years earlier, due to pumping out so much underground water. Gosh, could the same thing be happening along the Atlantic coast?

They made those loans because the government promised to bail them out if the loans soured, and the government said there would be consequences for not making enough subprime loans.

Oh yes it did, starting back in the Clinton era. I forget what they called it, other than subprime lending. Banks were specifically told the government (taxpayers) would back their risky loans, and if they did not cooperate, there would be consequences.

The claims were "extinction" and "disappearance" by now, not "lower from some cherry picked date". People don't resort to shenanigans like that when they have truth on their side. You, sir, act as if you do not have truth on your side.