for early access to the latest igaming videos!
and get the latest igaming news first!
Like most communities right now, AI is the main topic of debate among freelance writers – and iGaming creators are no exception. Most people are fighting about whether it’s “right” or “wrong” to use these tools. But one thing we’re not focusing on is what that actually means.
“What are you talking about, Dominic? It’s pretty simple – do you use AI or not?”
Is it really that straightforward, though? In my experience, much of this discussion is fuelled by two camps totally misunderstanding each other. If we’re to have any serious discourse, we must first collectively agree on a definition of what constitutes AI usage.
Let me explain what I’m getting at.
LinkedIn-spiration
I’m fairly active on LinkedIn, and AI is a particular hobby horse of mine. When I’m not discussing gambling topics, I’m usually moaning about pseudoscientific AI checking tools, or possibly em dashes.
Since your algorithm reflects what you engage with, I see plenty of hot takes, many of which are truly atrocious. Like, to the point of wondering how these people manage to dress themselves in a morning.
Here’s an example:
Here, the poster references the common accusation – one that I’d make myself – that using AI to write any sort of content is “cheating”. And in their post, the author conflates the use of LLMs with dictionaries.
Now, dear reader, I’m confident I don’t need to explain that this poster is pretending not to understand the difference. After all, they can’t possibly expect us to believe that looking up “conman” in the Oxford English Dictionary is identical to having ChatGPT generate a 30-page ebook called “How to Be a Social Media Grifter”.
Many Such Examples
Please don’t think I’ve cherry-picked a single post to make a point here. Not a day goes by without encountering these abysmal posts. They’re everywhere. Although they’re not as common in the iGaming content community, they do exist.
Here’s another example:
This time, we’re invited to accept an even more egregious concept – that typing into a Microsoft Word document is exactly the same as generating text using Perplexity or Claude.
The author seems to be saying that, unless we’re daubing ochre ink onto papyrus, or perhaps even chiselling our words onto stone tablets, we’re all guilty of cheating.
Now, if you’re smart enough to build a brand on LinkedIn, I don’t believe you possess the room temperature IQ necessary to believe such absurdity. The more logical conclusion is that it’s designed to elicit engagement.
And it works. I bite every single time – I can’t help myself. And when I fall for ragebait, I know I’m not the only one.*
*I borrowed this from Sam Smith. Which is just as bad as using AI. Probably.
AI Engagement Bait is Unhelpful
These posts aren’t just harmless fun, or what I’ve heard the kids call “shitposting”. It’s actively getting in the way of the real discussion – should writers be using AI in their creative process at all?
Is it moral? Is it ethical? Where can it be used? What are the boundaries? These are the real talking points – not pretending to be stupid for likes.
Before we can move the discussion along, we must call this obvious ragebait out – or better yet, ignore it entirely.
Defining the Problems with AI in Writing
It seems, to me at least, that a clear, collectively-agreed-upon definition of what “using AI means” would help. Posts like these would soon disappear if we had a sign to tap.
So, what is that definition? It’s an important question, because a second category exists within the genre of “deliberately misunderstanding in AI in writing”, as seen in this post:
Here, the bait-and-switch is the author acting like they’re using LLMs to do all of the work, but – surprise! – they’ve only partially incorporated it into their process.
It’s a take that is equally annoying, but far less stupid. It gets to the heart of my point – what is allowed and what isn’t? Where are the lines?
This is what the debate should be about, rather than disingenuously pretending not to understand the entire issue. And it remains an open conversation – I don’t claim to have solved everything.
When Is It Acceptable for Writers To Use AI?
That said, to my mind, it’s all very simple. When someone says “using AI is cheating”, they mean text generation.
Almost nobody cares if you ask ChatGPT for topic suggestions when dealing with writer’s block. I’m pretty sure I once asked Perplexity for gambling-related topics a writer might include on their personal blog. Sure me.
People are certainly not beefing with spellcheck, or even grammar tools. That must be one of the most bizarre takes in history.
Research also seems acceptable. As an iGaming writer, AI can be a useful starting point with casino or sportsbook reviews, for example. You wouldn’t use it for a newly released slot game – the LLM would just hallucinate everything. But it’s fine when dealing with the basics.
The real problem is using LLMs to generate text.
That’s it. That’s the line.
Article Structure and Headings
This one might be contested a little more. But personally, I don’t even care if a writer gets their chosen AI to spit out an entire structure, including titles, key words and subheadings.
I wouldn’t do that myself, because I think LLMs are terrible at those tasks. They’re reliant on other people’s content and research, for one.
But if you’re writing something simple, that’s already been produced a thousand times before – the rules of roulette, or counting cards in blackjack, for instance – I can see the case for AI speeding this but of the content creation process up.
If you really want to do that, knock yourself out. As long as the final text comes out of your own brain, that’s all that matters.
It’s That Simple
Honestly, there’s nothing more to it. The “cheating” part is – quite clearly – using AI to generate the text.
If the content is vomited out of an LLM – even if you go on to edit it yourself – that’s what people are complaining about. Everything else is noise and nonsense.
Still, the writing community doesn’t seem to agree it’s that simple. This viewpoint is not yet set in stone – hand-carved or otherwise. Which is why I decided to publish an AI usage policy on my website.
We’re yet to reach a collective consensus, but at least my own clients have no doubt about how I use – or more accurately, don’t use – AI in my iGaming content.
