The whole premise of checking for human writing is daft
4 hours ago
- Typing every word by hand is an outdated test of human thought; intelligence lies in intention, judgment, and responsibility, not in physical keystrokes.
- A person can type thousands of words mindlessly, while another can use AI to refine ideas and produce thoughtful work, yet current rules unfairly label the latter as suspicious.
- Historical tools like fire, calculators, and spellcheck were initially criticized for diminishing human abilities, but eventually became ordinary and expanded human potential.
- The demand for proof of human writing excludes people with disabilities who rely on assistive technology, such as Stephen Hawking or users of mouth-controlled devices.
- Authorship depends on who owned the ideas, made the decisions, and takes responsibility for the work, not on how words were physically produced.
- Schools and employers can test specific skills when needed, but making unaided typing a universal test of humanity is technologically backward and exclusionary.