dr stacey patton is an award-winning reporter with thousands of paid subscribers on here, currently #2 rising in culture, and every single thing she posts is mindless ai-generated drivel. just look at this one: drstaceypatton1865.subs… a compacted mass of vague cultural stereotypes regurgitated by a word-association machine that has never and could never experience anything of the actual world. she’s charging people money for this. pathetic! i genuinely believe that this is a kind of fraud, and the people who do it should be made to give back all their money and then forced to write an endless series of formally inventive essays while trapped in a hot air balloon for twenty to thirty years
Resolves YES if someone posts a link in the comments to a Stacey Patton Substack post that addresses claims she uses AI to write her articles by end of September. It counts if that is not the main topic of the post. It does NOT count if she just addresses them in a comment, or in another forum.
This market is partially supposed to measure whether these claims get more prominent, I was trying to think of a better proxy.
General policy for my markets: In the rare event of a conflict between my resolution criteria and the agreed-upon common-sense spirit of the market, I may resolve it according to the market's spirit or N/A, probably after discussion.
1,000