Interesting thought. This guy relates the upcome of AI (non-fiction) writing to the lack of willingness people have to find out what is true and what is false.

Similar to Nas & Damian Marley's line in the Patience song -- "The average man can't prove of most of the things that he chooses to speak of. And still won't research and find the root of the truth that you seek of."

If you want to form an opinion about something, do this educated, not based on a single source--fact-check, do thorough research.

Charlie Munger's principle. "I never allow myself to have [express] an opinion about anything that I don't know the opponent side's argument better than they do."

It all boils down to a critical self-thinking society.

Labor-based grading in writing allows students to listen and adjust to comments which gives them greater freedom and autonomy in both their learning process as well as their writing.

Ideally, in a system like this, a shorter feedback loop of commentary and readjustment may also help to more carefully hone their skills versus potentially hitting a plateau after which it's more difficult to improve.

Following their Foucault reference, this reminds me of his "Self Writing" piece. The self is formed through the physical, material act of writing -- "the present as actual" -- and the transmission of self across space and time through the letter -- "the present as virtual". The subject, then, emerges against the interplay of the material and the virtual.

This reminds me of Foucault's Self Writing.

Throughout this section, Foucault characterizes correspondence as a way to reveal the self: "a certain way of manifesting oneself to oneself and to others," to "show oneself," "a decipherment of the self by the self as an opening one gives the other onto oneself."

This sort of 'opening' is to make oneself vulnerable, to be seen by others. (cf. Marback's "A Meditation on Vulnerability in Rhetoric")

This is characteristic particularly of writing that is intended for others (correspondence), but in what ways are other forms of writing equally--if not more--revealing of the self?

(That also makes me question whether any writing is truly for the self and not intended in some way for others. Even diaries/journals are written with the possible eventuality that someone other than the writer will read it.)

The idea of people requiring only the simplest of tools to make an impact on the world is one that makes me connect this piece to the one by Foucault. As this author states, it may be disappointing that the only tools necessary to tackle large issues are notebooks and the ideas within them, making them come off to me more as encyclopedias of past experiences to aid in future ones, or rather they are just a different representation of the self-writing that Foucault mentions.

To me, this idea of writing that speaks and reveals information to a "director" is the very basic idea for what first person narratives are.

Furthermore, this idea of confessing to an audience through an interactive narrative translates to various media, as well. However, even though these confessions are seemingly necessary in textual renditions of narratives, they can often be misconstrued as more intrusive fourth wall breaks due to this change in media. This creates a very thin line between these confessions being additive to the narrative or if they take away from the overall intent of the author.

To keep this idea going still, upon researching the definition of "cogitationes," the definitions were either of self-reflection, thoughts, or the act of thinking; something clearly represented through Foucault's writing, but a connection I found interesting, nonetheless.

A nice strong connection to Foucault's "Self Writing" and shaping of the self.