“No AI” Statements Are Much More Than Mere Statements
“No AI” Statements Are Much More Than Mere Statements
“No AI” 声明不仅仅是声明
21 Jul, 2026 2026年7月21日
I came across orchids’ post sharing their conflicted feelings on whether or not “No AI” statements are genuinely necessary, helpful and/or useful. In their post, orchids argues that the onus is on the viewer/reader to distinguish human-created content from AI-generated one; it can be an indication of questionable quality of your work if it leads the viewer/reader to believe it was AI-generated, and as long as your voice and style are embedded in your works, it’s already enough (at least this is my interpretation of the final paragraph of their post). I strongly disagree with most of the post, and I think the post missed some important considerations. I believe that, now more than ever, it’s necessary and useful to label your human-made content as such because AI’s ability to replicate the final results of human work will only improve over time.
我偶然读到 orchids 的一篇文章，文中分享了他们对于“No AI”（非人工智能生成）声明是否真正必要、有益或有用所持的矛盾心理。Orchids 在文中认为，区分人类创作内容与 AI 生成内容是观众/读者的责任；如果你的作品让观众/读者误以为是 AI 生成的，这可能暗示了作品质量存在问题；只要你的个人风格和声音融入了作品，这就足够了（至少这是我对他们文章最后一段的理解）。我强烈不同意该文的大部分观点，我认为它忽略了一些重要的考量。我相信，现在比以往任何时候都更有必要且有用地标注你的原创内容，因为 AI 复制人类成果的能力只会随着时间推移而不断提升。
“Made by human” statements have been around since before AI
“人工制造”声明在 AI 出现之前就已存在
Fancy handmade kitchenware is labeled “Handmade in [country]”; mom-and-pop bakeries label their breads “Homemade”; indie games and animated series make explicit statements that all the art was hand-drawn. There’s a reason why the act of making such statements well predates the rise of AI as you simply cannot rely on the other side—be it the consumer, the viewer or the reader—to have the “skills” to tell what’s made by human vs machine (now AI too). Just as machines have been able to create physical products that rival or surpass handcrafted ones, AI can already create content—audio, video and text—that, in many aspects, rivals human-made one. You may argue that you can tell when the text was AI-generated, but that’s now; what about the future, as AI gets better and better? Even right now in 2026, I’m not convinced anyone can consistently distinguish what’s written by AI and what’s not. The line is even blurrier when the content is part-AI, part-human (often called “AI-assisted”). The r/isthisAI subreddit has millions of weekly visitors because it’s harder and harder to spot AI-generated content. You’re never expected to be able to tell handmade ceramics from machine-made ones, so why should anyone be expected to be able to tell human-made content from AI-generated ones?
精美的手工厨具会标注“某国手工制造”；夫妻店面包房会标注面包为“自制”；独立游戏和动画系列会明确声明所有美术素材均为手绘。这种声明行为远早于 AI 的兴起是有原因的，因为你根本无法指望另一方——无论是消费者、观众还是读者——具备区分“人工制造”与“机器制造”（现在还包括 AI）的“技能”。正如机器已经能够制造出媲美甚至超越手工制品的实体产品一样，AI 也已经能够创作出在许多方面足以媲美人类作品的内容——包括音频、视频和文本。你可能会争辩说你能分辨出哪些文本是 AI 生成的，但那是现在；随着 AI 越来越强大，未来又会怎样呢？即使在 2026 年的今天，我也不相信有人能始终如一地分辨出什么是 AI 写的，什么是人写的。当内容是“人机协作”（通常称为“AI 辅助”）时，界限就更加模糊了。Reddit 上的 r/isthisAI 子版块每周有数百万访问者，因为识别 AI 生成内容正变得越来越难。没人会要求你必须能区分手工陶瓷和机器陶瓷，那么为什么又要求人们必须能区分人类创作和 AI 生成的内容呢？
There was a time when people automatically assumed a body of text was AI-generated when they see the use of em dashes. As someone who loves using the em dash, that was an infuriating trend that simply led to many false positives and frustrated writers. I’ve had my comments on Reddit labeled as written by ChatGPT just because they were well-written and -formatted. I’ve put my writings in AI detectors before and it would come back saying it’s “80% written by AI.” I also recently came across this comment on a Reddit thread discussing some audio software: “at this point i just assume unless the creator is screaming from the rooftops “I HAND CODED THIS” its vibe coded.”
曾几何时，人们一看到破折号（em dash）的使用，就会自动认定这段文字是 AI 生成的。作为一个喜欢使用破折号的人，这种趋势令人愤怒，它只会导致大量的误判，让创作者感到沮丧。我曾在 Reddit 上的评论仅仅因为文笔好、排版整洁，就被贴上“ChatGPT 撰写”的标签。我曾把自己的文章放进 AI 检测器，结果显示“80% 由 AI 撰写”。最近，我在一个讨论音频软件的 Reddit 帖子中看到了这样的评论：“现在我默认，除非创作者在大声疾呼‘这是我手写的代码’，否则它就是 AI 生成的（vibe coded）。”
It’s clear that viewers are terrible at detecting AI-generated content and some have even assumed a “generated by AI unless declared otherwise” position. I don’t blame them as the tell-tale signs of AI constantly change and dwindle—how can we expect our audience to keep up with that?
很明显，观众在识别 AI 生成内容方面表现得很糟糕，有些人甚至采取了“除非另有声明，否则一律视为 AI 生成”的立场。我不怪他们，因为 AI 的特征在不断变化和减少——我们怎么能指望观众跟上这些变化呢？
It’s never about quality, voice and/or style
这从来都不关乎质量、声音或风格
This paragraph that orchids wrote in their post saddens me: If someone thinks my work is LLM-generated, then my work is probably shit and doesn’t have a distinct voice. It’s boring. And it might as well be AI because the difference doesn’t really matter at the end of the day.
Orchids 在文中写的这段话让我感到难过：如果有人认为我的作品是大型语言模型（LLM）生成的，那么我的作品可能就是垃圾，没有独特的个人声音。它很无聊。而且它和 AI 生成的也没什么两样，因为归根结底，这两者之间并没有什么区别。
I think it’s highly problematic to believe that one’s work “might as well be AI” if it’s of low quality (but how is “quality” even defined?), lacks a distinct voice and/or boring. Academic articles and dissertations can be dry and boring to most; a user guide of a piece of software can lack a distinct voice; and an essay written by a high school student may be low-quality—but I can appreciate them all the same when they were fully written by people, not AI. Not all works need to be interesting or to have a voice. Technical writing is an example where you often do not want those qualities, and it’s a field of study that some people go to school for to specifically develop skills to write in technical contexts.
我认为，如果因为作品质量低（但“质量”到底该如何定义？）、缺乏独特声音或无聊，就认为它“和 AI 生成的没区别”，这是非常有问题的。学术文章和论文对大多数人来说可能枯燥乏味；软件用户指南可能缺乏独特的个人声音；高中生写的文章可能质量不高——但当我知道它们完全是由人而非 AI 撰写时，我依然能欣赏它们。并非所有作品都需要有趣或具有个人风格。技术写作就是一个例子，你通常并不需要那些特质，而且这是一个专门有人去学校学习，以培养在技术语境下写作技能的领域。
The truth is that people still value handmade items and homemade foods that can easily be machine-made not because they’re better (though sometimes they are), but because we know someone—or multiple people—put in the time, energy and effort to create it. I argue that it’s exactly the same reason why many people yearn for text written by human and “hand-coded” apps rather than vibe coded ones. A blog post fully written by a blogger may have typos, grammatical errors and incoherent paragraphs, but maybe that’s because the blogger isn’t good at writing and is therefore actively working on their writing; maybe the blogger is a language learner; or maybe the blogger is an extremely busy new parent who doesn’t have the time to proofread but still wants to write. Despite the “lower quality,” that blog post would still be valuable because it was the result of dedication, efforts and thoughts by a person.
事实是，人们依然珍视那些本可以轻易由机器制造的手工制品和家常食物，这并不是因为它们更好（尽管有时确实如此），而是因为我们知道有人——或多个人——投入了时间、精力和心血去创造它。我认为，这正是许多人渴望人类撰写的文本和“手写代码”的应用程序，而不是 AI 生成内容的原因。一篇由博主完全亲手撰写的博客文章可能会有错别字、语法错误和逻辑不连贯的段落，但这可能是因为博主不擅长写作，正在努力提升；可能是因为博主正在学习这门语言；又或者是博主是一位极其忙碌的新手父母，没有时间校对但仍想写作。尽管“质量较低”，那篇博客文章依然是有价值的，因为它是某个人奉献、努力和思考的结晶。
On a more practical level, attempting to use quality, voice or style as touchstones for human-made content is inherently futile as AI can generate any of those now—it’d a huge mistake to think that AI cannot generate text with a distinct voice or style. These days, I’ve even found myself having to remove quality to get around “AI detectors” on Reddit. I recently published a detailed, well-formatted post to a subreddit, and it got automatically removed because it was flagged as AI-generated. To get pass the AI detector, I had to reduce the level of detail, remove the formatting (bullet points, headings, italics etc.) and rewrite it like someone word-vomited it on a phone—I was furious by the end.
从更实际的层面来看，试图将质量、声音或风格作为人类创作内容的试金石是徒劳的，因为 AI 现在完全可以生成这些东西——认为 AI 无法生成具有独特声音或风格的文本是一个巨大的错误。最近，我甚至发现自己不得不降低文章质量来绕过 Reddit 上的“AI 检测器”。我最近在一个子版块发布了一篇详细且排版精美的帖子，结果因为被标记为 AI 生成而自动被删。为了通过 AI 检测，我不得不减少细节，删除排版（项目符号、标题、斜体等），并把它重写得像是在手机上随手乱敲出来的——我最后简直气疯了。
“No AI” is often a stance
“No AI” 通常是一种立场
To me, the purpose of “No AI”… 对我而言，“No AI”的目的……