
Yesterday, the Chicago Sun-Times (and then also the Philly Inquirer) published an issue of their newspaper that included an insert about fun summer things, and in that was a list of fifteen great summer reads, blah blah blah. Harmless enough, until of course you realize that ten of those fucking books don’t fucking exist because the writer (“writer”), Marco Buscaglia, used generative AI to generate the list of books. (He also seems to have used it in the rest of the insert, as well.) It literally includes books by real authors that do not exist. It also bungles descriptions of existing books. And then? This went unvetted into the world, unexamined, untouched, unworried, unbothered. Someone straight up closed their eyes, hummed a song, and slammed a happy finger down on the YES PUT THIS OUT INTO THE WORLD IMMEDIATELY button.
The problems with this are so myriad, I do not think my blog has the bandwidth to publish them. I could rage-shriek terabytes of just angry ululations about how generative AI is a rash that pops up in places you don’t want it, which is to say, literally everywhere. A rash is underselling it. It’s a cancer, bloating into full on metastasis as its tendrils push through our entire information system like the shoots, roots and runners of an invasive plant out to crush everything under a mat of bedstraw and bindweed.
I’ll focus on two things.
First, this just continues to absolutely damage (and ultimately destroy) the fidelity of our information systems. We are fast approaching the point where the boundaries of fiction and truth have dissolved utterly, plunging us into a river of garbage puked up by billionaire computers and their mindless lazy-fuck users. Anything is true. Everything is false. We’re cooked.
Second, the push for AI is by billionaires and tech-bro “break everything and disrupt the world back into the stone ages” villains but it is one seized upon and urged forth by carriers like the writer (“””writer”””) of that article, Marco Buscaglia. That guy was like, “Ennh, I don’t really want to do all this work,” and so he took his brain out of his head, shoved the machine into his empty skull, and gave it a hard poke, telling it to DO SOMETHING. Generative AI is the tool of the lazy and the unimaginative, the slugabed bullshit artist, the idea-fetishist, the disinterested and callous, the ignorant eyes-forced-shut soft-boy dimwits, the people who simply don’t care enough to make the journey and care only to teleport to the destination, the people for whom work and effort and knowledge is all just an impediment to result, result, result. People who want to build a building but don’t want to ever understand how architecture works. People who want to take their driving tests in a Waymo. People who want cheat codes for everything in life. People who are definitely going to try to marry a fuck-bot someday*.
Here’s the trick, though —
These people are, unsurprisingly, rubes.
Because they misunderstand the fundamental problem with generative AI, particularly when it comes to using it for informational services —
AI doesn’t know anything.
I’ll say that again, a bunch more times, because you need to get that:
AI doesn’t know anything.
AI doesn’t know anything.
AI doesn’t know anything.
AI doesn’t know anything.
AI DOESN’T KNOW ANYTHING.
AI isn’t smart. It does not have ideas. It is not sentient. It does not think. It is, almost literally, a super-fancy lorum ipsum generator. It is you giving it the parameters of a block of text, and saying, “Fill this space with the shape of the thing I’m asking about.” It will conjure not an answer, but an answer-shaped thing. That is all it does, all it can do, and all it will be able to do. Sometimes, the answer-shaped thing will contain fragments of Actual Answer. Sometimes it’ll even get it pretty close to right on. A lot of times? It’ll pollute the answer-shape with lots of made-up answer-shaped shit. Because it doesn’t know. It literally doesn’t vet the information. It cannot think its way through the information. It has no brain. It has no soul. It has no wit, no awareness, no wisdom, no knowledge. It has, at best, the cumulative wit and awareness and wisdom and knowledge of whatever it has eaten — which is to say, whatever was stolen for it by the billionaire tech-bro shitheads, stuff stolen and then crammed into its wood chipper mouth. Then it whirs and chews and chips it all into a meaty slurry, then horks up partially-digested chunks of that wit/awareness/wisdom/knowledge into the shape you want. But all the material has been smashburgered together. It is now just ground meat.
Uncooked ground meat.
It is bad at the job they are telling you it does. Further, this bad job it does comes at quite the high cost: it ruins, as noted, our information fidelity; it is based on material not offered to it but stolen for it from actual human beings who did not consent to having their life’s work ripped out of their hands and casually tossed into the wood chipper; it is destroying the environment, guzzling water, eating power.
Generative AI is a consumer. It eats and eats and eats. And all it can do with that is either throw it back up, or shit it out. And neither its shit nor its barf are nutritious.
Stop using it.
Not for art. Not for words. Not for information. Not for learning, for writing papers, for grading papers, for composing articles, for reading and parsing articles, for farming ideas, for executing ideas, for photos or drawing or videos or shitty stupid AI slop memes.
It lies because it doesn’t know not to.
It plagiarizes because that’s the only way it can do what it is tasked.
It kills the world because everybody is demanding we use it and they’re cramming it in every digital orifice across the internet and across our devices.
Just say no to generative AI.
And definitely, definitely don’t have it write a goddamn article for you, and definitely definitely DEFINITELY do not publish that fucking article.
WTF JFC FFS.
* I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to judge you for marrying your fuck-bot, I feel like that’s kinkshaming, and neither you nor your fuck-bot deserve that. Unless of course your fuck-bot is built using generative AI, in which case, it goes in the volcano, sorry.
Anyway, buy my book or I perish in the abyss. No AI was used in writing the book, because art and story is by people, for people, and I am people. Also I’m not a lazy fucking rube.

thelma scudi says:
Concerning the Big, Beautiful, Budget, there is a hidden but deadly item: the Republicans have slipped in a provision that would allow Trump to ignore every TRO or injunction that has already been issued against the administration!
PLEASE POST THIS FAR AND WIDE. IF THE CONGRESS GIVES TRUMP LEGAL PERMISSION TO IGNORE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM WE ARE IN BIGGER TROUBLE THAN WE KNOW.
May 21, 2025 — 3:31 PM
Ellen M. Gregg says:
Bravo, Chuck! This absobloominlutely needed to be said.
May 21, 2025 — 3:49 PM
Tim Weed says:
Yeah, Wendig! Very well said. Best thing I’ve ever read on AI, full stop.
May 21, 2025 — 3:59 PM
Michelle says:
Thank you, that is all.
May 21, 2025 — 4:13 PM
angeliquejamail says:
I couldn’t agree with this harder if I’d written it myself. WTAF JFC FFS indeed.
May 21, 2025 — 5:47 PM
butucancallmez says:
SAY IT LOUDER FOR THOSE IN THE DAMN BACK, MY MAN!!!
May 21, 2025 — 6:48 PM
bluespiderwort says:
Amen! Lately I can even tell when I start to read it. The paragraphs have words, sometimes big words, and lots of sentences, but they frequently say nothing.
May 21, 2025 — 6:51 PM
Chris Taylor says:
Maybe you’re getting into the theory of knowledge. Maybe you’re using the wrong AI tools.
If I tell Grok, or ChatGPT to give me a cumulative list of today’s NBA, MLB, WNBA, NHL games and their current money lines, it will give those to me – accurately. Gemini does not/cannot because of the way it works. (I’m sure there are other AI tools in the same boat as Gemini).
May 21, 2025 — 7:03 PM
terribleminds says:
All the AI tools fail to know anything.
And yes, nobody is saying it’s wrong all the time. Even I, in this post, said:
“Sometimes, the answer-shaped thing will contain fragments of Actual Answer. Sometimes it’ll even get it pretty close to right on.”
This doesn’t mean it’s reliable. They’re probably not even going to reliably give you the right answer to the question you’re asking each time, because each time, it’s reformulating an answer based on what it has scooped up and how it can use that scooped-up data-goo to fill the empty answer shell provided by your question.
May 22, 2025 — 8:11 AM
Christopher Taylor says:
Look, I understand I may be splitting hairs here but walk through this with me:
I show you a picture of a rope apple (without telling you it’s an apple) and I ask you to tell me what it is. You say apple (or maybe even a specific type of apple if you’re an apple expert)
Now do the same with ChatGPT – it will tell you it’s an apple.
You arrived at the answer by accessing chemically stored knowledge or memory. You accessed your internal data banks.
How is that much different than AI accessing data banks of much much larger scope?
May 22, 2025 — 8:55 AM
terribleminds says:
Oh, I dunno, let’s see, it’s because…
I’m a human? I’m a human being. With a brain. And critical thinking. I’m not a piece of software designed by billionaires to just gobble up everything around me and spew it back out worse than when I ingested it. What the fuck. This is just such an inane, simplistic take. “Oh, if you use a knife to cut meat, it’s fine — you had a knife, so you sliced meat. You know who else does that? Serial killers. Therefore, serial killers are okay, and you are the same as one.” GTFO. WTF. C’mon.
May 23, 2025 — 9:43 AM
sewcraftyme says:
Never did I imagine we would have actual proof of GIGO, for those who don’t know that acronym: Garbage In – Garbage Out It’s like a mockingbird for goodness’s sake, but one with a faulty memory, because it only spits out what it last heard, or heard two weeks ago. In other words, your article, and you, are 1000% dead right.
May 22, 2025 — 4:14 PM
evebarbeau says:
Well said! And thank you for saying so.
May 21, 2025 — 8:50 PM
chrisheinz says:
The Bullshit Apocalypse may be unstoppable at this point.
https://portraitofthedumbass.blogspot.com/2024/06/bullshit-all-way-down.html
May 21, 2025 — 9:41 PM
Mozette says:
Thank you!
Thank you!
Thank you!
tank you
thnak you!
Yes… I actually wrote all those myself – not my computer, Chuck, buddy old pal! I’ve been against this almighty ghost in the machine which the billionaires are boasting as the biggest and best thing since Betty White… and they’re just wrong!
I’m so happy someone had the gonads to say it!
Thank you again over and over the bottom of heart and the heart of my bottom!
May 21, 2025 — 10:46 PM
Melissa Clare says:
Thanks for saying this, and putting it together in such a coherent (and, yes, entertaining) way. This applies to more than just writers. I read it out to my programmer spouse, who was laughing and nodding (and ranting) along. Have you considered publishing it more widely? (Not sure what the profanity-reduced edit looks like, but maybe it’s worth a try.)
May 22, 2025 — 3:48 AM
Barbara Truelove says:
Louder for the people in the back!
May 22, 2025 — 8:49 AM
Dave Williams says:
Ten of the books don’t exist?!?!?!?!?!?! Ummmmm… where were the editors of the newspapers??
May 22, 2025 — 9:47 AM
Jemima Pett says:
I read in the New Scientist yesterday that research on AI diagnostics indicated that AI does not understand the use of ‘no’ and ‘not’. So diagnoses stating ‘this person has no signs of cancer,’ could mean the same as ‘this person has signs of cancer’. I can hunt up the ref if you like.
May 22, 2025 — 10:22 AM
sewcraftyme says:
I also read that, but in a different publication, though the name escapes me right now.
I have a hard time believing that so many people are willing to give over so much to what amounts to a very angry, tantrum throwing baby.
May 22, 2025 — 4:21 PM
Disappointed says:
Ableist take. ChatGPT has helped me in my small business and helped me with my health. If you’re looking at it to write books or things like that, yes, its worthless and should be used for things that you are actually publishing (and if you do, you deserve the blowback). But it is a great tool for boot-strapping small business owners and people who are chronically ill/disabled. I’ve used it to help me figure out work life balance, schedules for fitting in my writing time, rest, small biz work, and more. Its something I can ask stupid questions my autistic self would be mortified to ask anyone else. It helps explain things I don’t understand when I am having a really bad brain fog day and need things broken down to the basic data.
Moreover, in my 9-5, an attorney in legal publishing, I am REQUIRED by my job description to use Gen AI daily or I’m PIP-ed. Not for content creation, but a lot of other things. I thought you were better than painting everyone who uses AI as lazy fucks who are unable to critically think enough to fact check CHAT GPT, but it seems like I was wrong.
No longer a reader,
A disabled, soul-less, lazy POS
May 22, 2025 — 10:56 AM
terribleminds says:
Thing is, AI is itself ableist, and has been shown to have biases against disability time and time again.
Further, none of this changes the point that it is:
a) environmentally destructive
b) built on reams of stolen work
c) wrong, full of confirmation bias, full of problematic prejudicial bias
NaNoWriMo tried the same excuse – saying criticism of AI and those who support it is classist and ableist. But that does not pass any smell test I can muster. Never mind the fact that it’s shown that AI use in academic environments off-loads critical thinking to the machine — it’s literally making us less capable, not more capable. I’m sorry you found this all troubling, but I haven’t been quiet about my criticisms of gen-AI and those who support it.
May 23, 2025 — 9:50 AM
acflory says:
Thank you for using your voice and your reach to say out loud that the Emperor has no clothes. I’m an Indie writer, and I create hand-made graphics, and I create videos, and I loathe the fact that there is nothing I can do to protect myself or my work. Copyright law is dead, buried by a corporate system which is deemed too big to fail. Except that it will fail, eventually. I just hope that ordinary, decent people survive the turmoil between now and then.
May 22, 2025 — 7:43 PM
CAT says:
One f the best, most succinct compilations I’ve readon why GenAI needs tobover a hill and die (insteadbof being valued at 200 mil IPO, wtf). Indeed, we should also rename it. What we have to date has absolutely NOTHING to do with intelligence, artificial or otherwise. That is a misnomer for the ages, a marketing stunt that went too far, in the end a fraud. And by naming it correctly we’d start to take the power from it. Hopefully.
May 23, 2025 — 1:39 AM
Fatman says:
Interesting.
I noticed this particular weak spot of LLMs many months ago, when I was trying to recall the title and author of a book I’d read in the distant past and entered a rough synopsis into ChatGPT. It responded with a very credible-looking list of works, all by real authors. When I tried to look them up, every single book turned out to be non-existent.
Don’t know anything about the Sun-Times and their general trustworthiness, but it’s fairly shocking that a paper would run an LLM-generated piece without even a modicum of fact-checking. How long would it have taken the editor to look up the books from the list?
@ Jemima Pett:
“I read in the New Scientist yesterday that research on AI diagnostics indicated that AI does not understand the use of ‘no’ and ‘not’.”
Or, how a buddy of mine explained it, an LLM can’t add 2 and 2. It trawls the internet, and if the majority of answers indicate 4, it responds “4”. Otherwise it’s “5”, or “7”, or “flower-decorated teapot”. GIGO at its worst (best?).
May 23, 2025 — 7:52 AM