Notes

This is the copyright law as I currently understand it. There are two basic principles at stake when it comes to the use of AI in writing:  Only material that was created by a human can be copyrighted.  You can't copyright an idea, only the expression of an idea.  Both principles taken alone sound reasonable in traditional contexts. There was a case where a monkey took a photo, and the photo could not be copyrighted because a human didn't produce it. And courts certainly put AI in the same category as an animal, so a purely AI-generated work cannot be copyrighted.  But works that show meaningful human creative input can still be protected. Zarya of the Dawn  is an interesting case, as a graphic novel. The author could copyright her own text for the novel, and she could copyright the specific arrangement of her images and text in the novel. But the images themselves could not be copyrighted, because they were generated by Midjourney.  That's alright when y...

I have finished The Serpent in the Grove  this morning. I ran its last 450 words through the Oratrice Mecanique d'Analyse Cardinale, whose verdict is: 100% AI-generated, with high confidence.  I've read a few of the critiques that people on X have made of the style of the piece. Comparing it with the style used in Shy Girl , with the AI tells that both share. One of the more interesting comments that I read was from a Madame Fragonard . She takes issue with the "conceptual errors" in the story, like with the "descriptions of voice and laughter."  I will not look at the screenshotted passage from Shy Girl . I cannot comment meaningfully about it, because I have not read Shy Girl and have no intention of doing so. But one highlighted example from Serpent  is "she had a laugh that shook dust from joists".  That was an image from the story that I actually liked and that made immediate sense to me. This large, boisterous woman who could laugh so hard ...

I am continuing to read The Serpent in the Grove . I have now fed its third group of a thousand words to the Oratrice Mecanique d'Analyse Cardinale, and its verdict is 100% AI-generated, with high confidence.  I finally made it to the infamous sentence, "The girl smiled like sunrise over a sink." The accusation is that the simile is meaningless. Nazir's defense is that the image comes from his childhood, when his mother used to polish the kitchen sink until it reflected the sunrise from a window facing east. Laura Miller rubbished this simile in Slate. She said it was meaningless to "anyone who didn't grow up with such a sink, mother, or window". It is not obvious from the image itself that the sunrise is being reflected directly from a polished sink. But as someone who has a sink by a window (and I think most people do), I have certainly seen it glow in sunlight. I have been suspending judgement about this sentence until I read it in its proper context...

I have more free credits today. So, I fed the next thousand words of The Serpent in the Grove into Pangram — still 100% AI generated, with high confidence. Once you get past the purple prose, it's an engaging story, and I'm enjoying reading it.  A good source of links about the story is Laura Miller's article  on him in Slate. It's a takedown piece, though, and nearly all her passages about him contain a sting in the tail.  I must take issue with one of them. She says, "He can talk about growing up in a 'rural sugarcane village in Trinidad,' and how the ravages of alcoholism that he witnessed there became the seed for his story". The sting in the tail is "(in which alcohol plays, at most, a minor role)."  This is hardly fair. It is alcohol that fuels farmer Vishnu's belief that the village hottie Zoongie wants him enough for him to want to kill his wife Sita to get with her. It is even less fair when it is clear from these thousand words...

I asked Grok to give me some examples of false positives generated by Pangram. Sillily, it gave me Shy Girl , even though Mia Ballard has already said that a friend may have "edited" it with AI. But in some ways, it's even more fascinating that another example it gave me was The Serpent in the Grove . This story was the winning entry for the 2026 Commonwealth Short Story Prize. It's available to read for free on Granta.com , so I ran the first thousand words of it through Pangram. They came back as 100% AI-generated, with high confidence. Then I actually chose to read them, and I'm almost sorry I did. This is very purple prose — choked with metaphors, including ones that seem nonsensical: "Maybe it was a name; maybe rain took a shape and decided to keep it." "She had the kind of walking that made benches become men." "The girl smiled like sunrise over a sink." (Not in the first thousand words but honorably mentioned by Marlon James on...

That's really what Pangram and other AI detectors are: the Oratrice Mecanique d'Analyse Cardinale. The mechanical weighing-scale-like device from Genshin Impact  that delivers both verdicts and sentences. Once its judgement has been made, even the Chief Justice must honor the results of the Oratrice. Shy Girl 's fate was sealed the moment the Oratrice said that it was 78% AI-generated. Even Hachette had to honor that result.  I don't feel sorry for Mia Ballard for stealing artwork for the cover. In fact, I don't know why she didn't just use AI to generate the artwork herself! But I do feel sorry for her that she's lost her book deal due to the probable high AI content of her work. I mean, the whole reason Hachette picked up her book in the first place was that it was already successful on KDP. She should've just been upfront about its AI content so they could have left her alone. But I also notice that all this started when Pangram was used to decide tha...