@addi.social is incredible! His art was used for my @foofarawpress.bsky.social story.
BREAKING: LOCAL WOMAN RESURRECTED more at 11

@prof-bogs.bsky.social
Words in Flash Fiction Online, Radon, Abyss & Apex, Dream Theory, etc Assistant Editor for Flash Fiction Online Lead guitar for Cokeworks, the band Creator & Host of The Archetypist substack Library Assistant
BREAKING: LOCAL WOMAN RESURRECTED more at 11
I loved your novel idea when we talked. Please write ittttt
@addi.social is incredible! His art was used for my @foofarawpress.bsky.social story.
This special issue introduction from @prof-bogs.bsky.social is riveting, so I'm eager to read the whole issue!
Also, yes, I know a lot of authors have simply stopped submitting because it's demoralizing to see so much slop published
I can definitely agree that this whole shitfest has been awful and dehumanizing. I feel for your friend. This is an awful time to be trying to publish. I don't think anyone is saying Pangram should be the gatekeeper, And if editors *are* saying that I'd no longer sub to their mags, tbh
to their argument. FWIW I'm happy to provide Pangram results of all of my published short stories (you can also run all of my Substack posts through it with their internal Pangram tool). Also, I'm not accusing this person of lying, just that my exp doesn't match and I'd like more transparent data.
Pangram 4 debuted right before this article IIRC. I have seen it before. This author's experience totally goes against my own experiences and the experiences of others I know using the program. It is notable that this author does not provide the actual text they ran, which would lend credence...
It's certainly not your friend's job to prove her work is human but I'm also very interested in seeing literally *anything* flagged false positive so I can calibrate my own internal editor. Attached is my attempt to try to fool it and then a story I generated based on that attempt.
I would genuinely love to see that work. I see scores of people claiming false positives but no one ever seems to want to share. I did have one friend get a false positive on a religious prayer she'd adapted for her aesthetic, but there are hundreds of AI versions of that prayer floating around.
To be more clear, I pretty much fully agree with @erincairns.bsky.social, and by trying to fool it I mean, I've tried to generate a false positive by cramming every AI tell I can think of into pangram and it's still giving me 100% human each time. I've run all my work through it with no issue.
I think if you're using Pangram to solely make editorial decisions then you shouldn't be an editor, to be frank. But I could view it as "tools in a toolbox" There's a lot of misinformation out there, much of it repeated in this thread. I've been trying to fool it and have been unsuccessful.
Let Yourself Suck: The Importance of Mediocrity in Creative Development reflecting on early-stage writing and how that uncomfortable feeling of just not being very talented is good for you, actually. or: why A.I. is ruining even more things or: just be cringe and write ๐ช๐
iโve been seeing the anatomical heart emoji being used as a react everywhere lately and if people could just not thatโd be great
All this talk of AI, Flock cameras, and the general enshittification of everything due to massive corporate greed could spur a new literary movement that looks back to a simpler time and imagines a more compassionate future: New Romanticism.
The Hugo's Best Semiprozine category has a problem. Every single nominee in the semi-pro category pays professional rates. Every single nominee in the semi-pro category is not a semi-pro magazine. The exact same professional publications get nominated every single year.