The Futility of AI Purity Tests
The market rewards what works, not what's "pure."
Links:
Your content goldmine is right in front of you face. Use it.
Needs ideas for minimalist eBooks? Here are some great ones.
Every few months, the same tired debate resurfaces: Is it “real writing” if AI touched it?
Reality check: readers don’t care.
They never have. They only want something useful or memorable.
Nobody checks if the draft started on a yellow legal pad, in Scrivener, or through ChatGPT.
They care if the words land.
The loudest voices against AI?
They’re the ones being left behind.
Every technological shift creates a class of gatekeepers who resist change: monks railing against the printing press, critics warning TV would rot the brain, journalists panicking over blogs.
The pattern repeats. Those who can’t adapt scold everyone else.
But guilt doesn’t scale.
It never has. The market rewards what works, not what feels pure.
If AI helps a writer produce clearer, sharper, or more consistent work, the audience doesn’t care.
They just want something worth reading.
The purists don’t want to admit this because it threatens their identity.
They built careers on being “the real writers.” But writing has never been about clinging to rituals.
It’s about communication. Readers want resonance, not credentials.
AI isn’t a threat to writing.
Mediocrity is. The tool just amplifies what’s already there, whether good or bad.
And history will forget how the words got written. It only remembers who read them, and why they stuck.
Stop wasting time on purity tests. Put your energy into words that matter.
The yobros claim they use advanced detailed prompts but it is obvious they use simple prompts and cut n paste big clue ask ai what’s wrong with article what’s missing who else would benefit….
> Is it “real writing” if AI touched it?
> Reality check: readers don’t care.
Phew... ;-)