Don’t Use AI to Write Things You Present as Your Own Work

James Bach, a veteran testing expert, published a strong opinion on his blog Satisfice: never use AI to write anything that you present as your own work. He argues that even saying “AI helped me” immediately undermines your credibility, because everyone knows AI does far more than just “help.”
The Core Argument
Bach’s policy is absolute: “I never let AI draft anything for me that has my name on it. Not one sentence. Nothing. Ever.” He compares using AI for writing to “hooking a motor to a stationary bike and calling that exercise” or “taking a helicopter to the top of Everest and saying that I summited.”
Trust and Reputation
Bach warns that once you admit to using AI, readers can’t know how much work you did. He says: “All I have is your word for it that you did any work at all.” This forces a “big fat asterisk next to anything you do.” He adds, “Only someone who uses AI to help their writing would say ‘I use AI to help my writing.’ And anyone who uses AI to help their writing may use it to do all of their writing. It’s such a steep and slippery slope to full laziness.”
Personal Anecdote
Bach describes a past ghostwriting experience where he wrote an article for someone else, choosing what to include and exclude. The article was published under the other person’s name, but it was substantially Bach’s work. He regrets it because it helped “burnish the professional image of a man who didn’t earn it.” He contrasts this with a deep collaborative chapter co-written with Jeff Nadelman, where both contributed substantially—Jeff through many hours of Zoom calls and personal stories. Bach says: “If AI deeply collaborates with you to write something, why am I saying you shouldn’t say you used AI? Because all I have is your word for it that you did any work at all.”
The Slippery Slope
Bach believes the line between “help” and “doing all the work” is too blurry. He advises: “Don’t tell me that AI helped you write, and don’t tell me that you did all the work when you only did some of it. Therefore, don’t use AI to write things for you that you present as your own work. If you DO, I will treat all your work as if it is slop or spam. And not just me, the entire community of serious professionals will discount ‘your’ work.”
Takeaway for Developers Using AI Coding Agents
While the article focuses on writing, the principle applies to code as well. If you use an AI to generate substantial portions of code or documentation that you claim as your own, you risk the same trust erosion. Be transparent about your tools and always review and refine the output. But Bach’s core advice is clear: don’t outsource creative or intellectual work and then take full credit.
📖 Read the full source: HN LLM Tools
👀 See Also

Delve accused of forking Sim.ai's open-source SimStudio and selling it as Pathways
Compliance startup Delve allegedly forked Sim.ai's open-source agent-building tool SimStudio, rebranded it as Pathways, and sold it without proper license attribution or monetary agreement with Sim.ai, potentially violating Apache license terms.

Claude Code v2.1.163: Version Pinning, Plugin List, Hook Improvements, and Critical Bug Fixes
Claude Code v2.1.163 adds requiredMinimumVersion/requiredMaximumVersion managed settings, /plugin list command, hook context improvements, and fixes for claude -p hangs, Windows EEXIST, and Bazel/EDR workflows.
Google DeepMind's AI Pointer: Reimagining the Mouse for Gemini Interactions
Google DeepMind introduces an AI-powered mouse pointer that uses Gemini to understand context, enabling commands like pointing at an image and saying 'Show me directions,' integrated into Chrome and Googlebook.

Designing a Team of Agents: How Google Antigravity Structures Subagents for Autonomous Code Generation
Google Antigravity reveals its subagent architecture for autonomous coding: seven specialized agent types from the Sentinel (front-desk) to the Auditor (authenticity checker). Relevant for OpenClaw's subagent design.