No applause for gutless and broad irresponsibility.
It's inanely bizarre to go to the efforts to get feedback from users when in the end what you are effectively saying is Medium was an 'open' platform all along and open to everything at the end of the day including anything that contradicts Medium as well.
I can appreciate transparency, but transparency just for the sake of ticking off a box for 'fairness' and 'openness' is ludicrous in the face of even inviting AI writing on an obviously human-based writing platform. It encourages outcomes, behaviours and mindsets that aren't really any different than producing clickbait (which Medium says they are against for the sake of quality of the ecosystem). It also gives the impression that Medium can only make itself valuable by mass collecting anything and everything under the sun--is this quality?-- for eventual private Medium uses at the mercy of Medium, may it be AI eventually as well.
Medium can't or won't see themselves responsible for any harmful influence they could naturally carry?
I had high expectations for Medium; for it to be a visionary and truly innovative platform, as impressed on us by your founder. So it's massively disappointing to see Medium just throw out a seemingly oblivious wide net and wait and see the consequences, and expect a 'corporate-like' response later in hindsight.
AI-written content should not deserve any place let alone copyright protection on your platform.
Diversity of thought and niche human knowledge doesn't come from AI that effectively steals content from each of us and combines it into a some 'novel' answer which individuals or companies then profit from; it comes from protecting the very creators whose content AI is generating off of. AI should be a tool used fairly but it crosses unnatural borders (including unfriendly governments) and will be abused at the detriment to way more than the benefit of the few.
Having no conviction of what responsible good Medium could do means Medium becomes part of the problem and the undefined dumpster--everything under the sun (including clickbait) and every tech novelty that holds obvious harm to the origin of the platform's mission (?) will be swept under your undiscerning policy net. You are ironically pointing out how private Medium publications have much stronger senses in their own policies than Medium itself, yet Medium will just merely stand by?
This perpetuates the image that Medium can't figure out who they are or what they stand for.
What's to stop Medium from 'innocently' destroying copyright protections through AI eventually or simply mis-utilising all the current writers' content to mass train your AI narration (or Medium is already doing that without proper compensation to the content writers).
Isn't Medium not being more upfront and honest to lower our expectations? Why pretend to be a neutral (or positive) corporate responsibility or even politically correct when Medium is acting as a private entity with private interests? That would much better prevent unnecessary misunderstanding with users and also avoid users in unwittingly submitting any stories on your platform that they only later realise should have deserved much more protection and value than is actually offered on a shapeless platform.
