IMHO, everything you just said boils down to "it's a matter of taste" or "I know it when I see it."

On one level, I don't disagree. Taking two fantasy authors I enjoy, Brandon Sanderson and Patrick Rothfuss, I would say that Patrick Rothfuss is the better literary writer, but at the same time, I enjoy Sanderon's books more and I enjoy Sanderson as an author far more. Both authors are highly literate and knowledgeable, and their works are clearly highly influenced and referential to many other works, tropes, and so forth. I would say Rothfuss's writing is more artful, but I don't know how to quantify that.

"Lasting value" is, just like, your opinion man, and (IMHO) boils down to spectrum of enjoyment.

I have done the same thing (both with actual LLM text and with my own writing). The detectors seem wildly inaccurate on all samples, and wildly inconsistent between different detectors.

I think of the Star Trek holodeck. There are many episodes that portray how human characters “write” holonovels. They design the characters, the personalities, the plots, etc., but the holodeck generates the dialog, responds to stimuli, and so forth.

I think it’s a pretty interesting possibility for table top especially. GMs could create a character plan that then operates as a Non-Player Non-GM Character. A wildcard in the game. I could see that introducing some interesting elements to play.

You lost me here. What happens in a human mind is not covered by copyright law? Are you talking solely internal thought processes that are never externalized in any way?

Because I can image a cartoon mouse all day long. Yellow gloves. Red shirt. Etc. But if I put that imaginary mouse to paper (no computer involved), Disney might have something say about it.

I wonder if something like this is where we may end up. Computer learning vs human learning may be one of the great legal (and moral and ethical) battles of our time.

As I said, I don't know what quality literature is. The Nazir piece reads like Joyce to me. Ulysses is certainly a classic, but I'm not sure I've ever met anyone whose read him outside of highschool or a college literature class! I can't stand it, personally, but props to the people who do love it. I went deep into the serialist music hole once upon a time, and I found a level of appreciation for something that had been unlistenable to me before. More power to people who find that in Joyce. Zahn is very well know and popular amongst certain nerd groups, but largely unknown outside of them. Eco's books have sold well, but do people actually read them? How many men read hockey romances or 50 shades?

I take umbrage at the term "quality literature!"

I believe literature should be evaluated primarily on an "do not enjoy...enjoy" spectrum.

Looping back to the topic at hand, I've said before that I'm afraid that one thing that LLMs may show is just how derivative and formulaic a great deal of human production is. (That's not necessarily a bad thing, either, IMHO.)

My wife grew up in Minnesota. I know, unfortunately, more about hockey romance novels than I ever wanted to.

"Amish porn" is a new one to me!

As I understand it, women are by far the biggest users of public municipal libraries today. I'm not sure if the current selections are a "chicken" or the "egg" in why that is.

Wtf is quality literature?

50 Shades of Grey sold 150 million copies. Quality literature?

Topseller on Amazon right now is a hockey romance novel. Quality literature?

How do they compare to The Name of the Rose (one of my favorite books) in terms of being quality literature?

Zahn's Star Wars novels sold millions of copies? Quality literature?

Hemingway (I've run into critics who HATE Hemingway)?

Ulysses (Joyce)?

I don't know what quality literature is, and I don't really care. For fiction, if I enjoy it, I'll read it. I've just skimmed a bit of the Nazir story, and it does absolutely nothing for me, but it sure does have the veneer and impenetrability of James Joycian writing.

Maybe the moral of the story should be, don't listen to the C suite OR the tech media!

That's amazing. I used Delphi in the 1990s at about the same time as, IIRC, Visual Basic 4.0. I enjoyed it at the time, and Object Pascal was a pretty reasonable language, but outside of maintaining legacy apps, I don't really get it. I'm surprised to see both it and Visual Basic so high on the list.

I guess I'm also surprised to see C at #2. Maybe because of Linux?

Mozilla has discussed what kind of bugs they found. Here's their blog entry: https://hacks.mozilla.org/2026/05/behind-the-scenes-hardening-firefox/

You should read it. It's a very level-headed article that avoids the for and against LLM-hype that so many low quality news sources report.

Around close to the same time, Greg Kroah-Hartman also commented on improving reports: https://www.theregister.com/software/2026/03/26/linux-kernel-czar-says-ai-bug-reports-arent-slop-anymore/5226256

Finding bugs is good. Integrating these kind of tools into a testing and build pipeline is a good idea.

You might want to check your sources.

Here's Anthropic's writeup (March). They say:

Here's Mozilla's writeup:

We are in an economic mania right now. Governments, corporations, startups, you name it, are all afraid of being left behind. They are buying up memory, disks, computing capacity because, well, if they don't, someone else--one of their competitors--will.

Supply will be expanded and built out while demand remains high.

How long will this take? That's the trillion dollar question. It could be months or it could be years, but at some point, demand and supply will come back into closer to equilibrium. Whether that's because demand crashes or because supply builds up to meet demand is another open question. This has to be one of the greatest repositioning of capital in recent memory.

Hah, agreement on something!

But, how do you know that humans aren't deterministic? Maybe my exact brain and body, when given the exact same external stimuli over the past however many years, would produce the exact same results? Can't prove it either way, so are you operating on faith and belief about human intelligence?

LLMs are generally considered a combination of stochastic and deterministic (training, specifically). Critics often use the term "stochastic parrots," for example. Since LLMs rely on randomness, if you have a truly random number source, does that make them non-deterministic?

Probably better to not go down this road.

It's too bad, because Dawkins has written some interesting things, and hey, being the inventor of the word "meme" and memetics is a pretty big deal.

His reaction here is just astoundingly ignorant. Reading the dialog where he makes a Trump joke and the LLM responds (predictably) sycophanticly is, to use the modern parlance, just cringe. I would have hoped for a more informed take.

Hah, you're losing your touch! I've seen you troll far better than this.