I feel the same way you do.

I have active an active substack account and also several Nostr identities
(and of course I'm on SN)

To be honest I have mixed feelings about having to "pay" to post as well as comment here.

I also felt a little steamrolled my first real day osting (5/20).

I would kindly suggest that reading is also an activity done for recreation/leisure, and thus aesthetics are an important part of what you write, if you want to get reader engagement. Thus, if a reader finds an AI-like style to be unappealing, then they don't really need any other reason to not engage with the piece, and it's on the writer to convince the reader to engage.

Point well taken.

Readers have to feel comfortable reading the article to engage with it, and if something feels artificial, overly optimized, or just "off," many people will disengage almost immediately (even if they cannot fully explain why).

That is actually part of what I was trying to explore in the article itself.

I do need to do a better job of this. Thanks for your feedback.

I respectfully disagree with several of the recent comments about this article, especially the idea that the “tool was thinking for me” or that the presence of AI-isms (like excessive use of lists) somehow invalidates the underlying point.

Did anyone actually notice the intentionally included example of unedited AI slop which I DELIBERATELY highlighted as a counterpoint?

Ironically, several people immediately reacted to the “synthetic” feel of that example — which was exactly the point I was making.

The original draft of this article actually contained far more AI-isms stylistically. I reduced many of them during editing, but clearly did not eliminate all of them (and that was intentional).

The actual question I was trying to explore was:
what distinguishes AI assistance from AI slop?

Or does the presence of any AI involvement now automatically collapse everything into:
“not real writing.”

But thanks for your feedback. It's helpful.

I disagree with your conclusion, although I do think I could have clarified this better.

Instead of:

“Strategy is still a real operating company.”

something like:

“I actually agree Bitcoin is now the dominant driver of valuation and identity for the company.”

would have been more precise.

My point was more that Strategy still has an underlying operating business and cash flow layer supporting the broader capital structure.

(they are not ONLY a bitcoin holding company, though that is their major focus)

Thanks for the feedback.

Thank you good to be here. Many of these articles were created a while back -- I'm just reposting them here to see if they get any traction.

We'll see.

I like what you are doing @plebpoet. it's quite interesting:

every week I take the top posts, memes, boosts from SN and create
an 8-page consumable with original artwork.
They are for sale for sats only on my website^

that is very interesting -- I will check out your site for sure.

I wrote this originally last summer "The Bitcoin Chronicles (about 6 articles)

the "Bitcoin Chronicles now spans 100s of stories across multiple arcs

Yes and also Facebook ugh

Very interesting.

Integrated multiple keys in continuum (SSH, PGP, Bitcoin, and Nostr)

Would you have suggestions about implementing or adding for support for Quantum resistant keys ?

Is it cheating if I use Clause or ChatGPT to write code ?

Thanks for that ! ! Yes -- I had "help" writing the article but I wrote it as a reaction a lot of "magic" thinking I saw --