Piensa tu mismo, ensayo en The Review (NYB) en su ediciĂłn para el 25 de Junio, fragmentos:
Think for yourself
Dan Chiasson
Profesor en Wellesley
Boston
"AI has made contemporaneous self-reflexivity almost a necessary precondition for anyone who tries to write about it, now that, from behind the blinking cursor marking my every pause and hesitation in writing this sentence, a serpent waits to strike. I would prefer not to write sentences that track their own emergence from thought; I don’t like the kind of faddish writing that does this, this very thing that I am doing; but now that I feel I must actively preserve thinking as the medium in which language is generated, against Google’s satanic offer to “Help Me Write,” I also feel I should think about what it is I’m preserving, and who, exactly, the tempter is, and why they are so eager to “help me” surrender the pleasure of making the next associative or logical leap on my own, from hints and insinuations found inside a brain that can never fully know itself, or—sorry if this seems vain—tire of trying."
El autor evade los lugares comunes de la crĂtica hacia la IA y en su lugar se pregunta por quĂ© es exactamente lo que distingue al proceso de escritura humana del robĂłtico y cita tres ejemplos: Elliot, Bischop y GlĂĽck. Los tres bellĂsimos ejemplos, por cierto. Luego de estructurar el ensayo en diferentes horas de su dĂa real, es decir: un dĂa cotidiano de un americano promedio, incluye un disclaimer interesante que deja a sus estudiantes de literatura, dice:
"AI Statement
I forbid students’ use of all forms of Artificial Intelligence, including Large Language Models (LLM), in my courses, unless I announce otherwise.
I believe that writing is the most astonishing of all human technologies. English professors teach the history of human innovations in this infinitely rich and adaptable technology. These innovations bear names like “The Canterbury Tales,” “Hamlet,” “To Autumn,” “Middlemarch,” “Ulysses,” “The Moose,” “Giovanni’s Room,” and “Beloved.” These innovators who have made and remade our language over the centuries are known as “poets,” “playwrights,” “novelists,” “critics,” “translators,” and “essayists.” I try to teach what is of value in their remarkable linguistic inventions, or others of equal value. I also try to teach students to detect in all texts the unique traces of the human mind.
My love for human language leads me to strongly oppose all attempts by machines to impersonate it. Furthermore, I am dismayed that some colleges and institutions have normalized AIuse for fields whose reason for being is to explore and promote the value of original human expression.
Even as a scholar and teacher of English, I do not believe that I am uniquely equipped to detect impersonation of human writing by LLM and other forms of AI. As a publishing writer, it seems I am mostly powerless to keep my work from being harvested against my will and repackaged by the major AI companies. I oppose the ways our unique human voices are being exploited for the concentrated profits of a few companies and executives.
I invite you to see a clear moral value in writing done by humans, as I do. If you do share this belief, please join my class and hold yourself to your own high and admirable standard. If you do not, please do not enroll.
In the English Department, we believe “Writing is for Humans.”
________
Supongo que este ensayo encabeza la ediciĂłn de la revista a propĂłsito del documento que Leon XIV publicĂł recientemente sobre el tema, pues, tanto en forma y fondo, trabaja el argumento teolĂłgico central de la encĂclica: la escritura es un patrimonio de la humanidad y es, hasta ahora, lo Ăşnico que redime al hombre de perder su alma, su inagotable singularidad.
Hace ya una década que dejé la cátedra, pero quienes continuaron esa carrera me han contado lo mucho que ha cambiado desde entonces, y lo irreconocible que se ha vuelto la persona del aprendiz.