“You know nothing… of the bottomless malice of humanity!” — Netero’s final act of defiance and his attempt to convey the depth of the darkness that exists within humanity, a darkness Meruem, in his isolated evolution, had never truly grasped.

In our relentless march toward a digital future dominated by artificial intelligence, we find ourselves locked in a familiar pattern — a technological cat and mouse game with striking parallels to another long-standing and largely unsuccessful battle: the war on drugs.

As both a software engineer and content creator, I’ve observed this emerging pattern with growing fascination and concern. The harder we try to control and restrict AI-generated content, the more ingenious the workarounds become. Sound familiar?

The Ubiquity Problem: AI Is Already Everywhere

Let’s start with a simple reality check: AI content generation tools are now accessible to virtually anyone with an internet connection. ChatGPT, Google’s Gemini, Mistral, Claude, and countless others offer free tiers that, while sometimes limited, provide more than enough capability to generate articles, stories, code, and images that range from mediocre to surprisingly good.

Even for those seeking premium features, the barrier to entry has plummeted. For the price of a fancy coffee each month, you can access capabilities that would have seemed like science fiction just three years ago. This widespread availability means that trying to restrict access to AI tools is fundamentally a losing proposition.

Consider this: when tools become this democratized, when the genie is this far out of the bottle, can we realistically expect to put it back? I think we all know the answer to that question.

The Eternal Cat and Mouse Game

The parallels to drug enforcement are unmistakable. For decades, law enforcement has attempted to stay ahead of drug producers and traffickers, only to find that for every tactic they develop, the other side creates two more to circumvent it.

AI content detection follows a similar trajectory. Companies develop increasingly sophisticated algorithms to detect AI-generated content, only for others to create tools that bypass these detectors. It’s an arms race with no end in sight — detection, evasion, better detection, more sophisticated evasion.

This leads us to an uncomfortable question: Is this endless cycle of technological one-upmanship really the best use of our collective resources? Or are we simply burning time, money, and talent in a battle that cannot be definitively won?

The Detection Dilemma: Proving AI Generation

How can you scientifically prove an image was AI-generated? More importantly, how can you prove it wasn’t? These questions aren’t merely academic — they’re at the heart of our current predicament.

The tools we have for detection face significant limitations. They produce false positives, miss sophisticated AI-generated content, and struggle with hybrid content that mixes human and AI input. Moreover, the very models used for detection are constantly playing catch-up with newer generation systems.

Let’s consider a simple scenario: you need a basic thumbnail image for your blog post, so you use an AI tool to generate it. Should you be penalized for this? Where do we draw the line between acceptable and unacceptable use of AI? And who gets to make these determinations?

What about partial use — articles that are human-written but AI-edited, or vice versa? The boundaries become increasingly blurred, and detection becomes progressively more complex.

Human Creativity Always Finds a Way

Never, ever underestimate human creativity — especially when there’s an advantage to be gained.

Remember the recent story “Roy” Lee, the 21-year-old Columbia University student who built an AI tool to cheat on LeetCode-style technical interviews? His program called “F*ck Leetcode” ran as an undetectable overlay during live interviews, feeding candidates real-time answers while evading detection software. He managed to secure offers from companies like Amazon, Meta, and TikTok before getting caught.

Roy’s story is instructive. Despite being expelled from Columbia and blacklisted by major tech companies, his case demonstrates how individuals will always find ways to use technology to their advantage, regardless of rules or consequences. I’ve written extensively about why F*ck Leetcode! Why Roy’s Story Matters and the implications for our industry.

Even if someone develops the perfect algorithm to detect AI-generated content today, how long do you think that victory would last? A week? A month? The cycle is perpetual.

The Ethical Guidelines Façade

Some suggest that ethical guidelines and principles will save us. I find this naïvely optimistic at best.

Do you honestly think all governments and private entities would adhere to such guidelines? The reality is that AI development is happening in multiple jurisdictions with varying levels of regulation and oversight. For every company or country that embraces ethical constraints, there will be others that prioritize advancement and application over potential risks.

Think of it as the Manhattan Project but for AI — there are almost certainly teams working on AI applications that operate in legally ambiguous or even dark areas, without significant concern for ethical implications or human safety.

So, if this is happening regardless, why should content creators, educators, and businesses hamstring themselves while others reap the rewards of these technologies?

Adaptation, Not Prohibition: A New Paradigm

Instead of fighting an unwinnable war against AI content, we need to focus on adaptation, regulation where practical, and creating better incentive structures.

Does this mean it’s game over for platforms that rely on genuine human content? Not at all. It means we need to evolve.

Blockchain-Based Solutions and Incentive Structures

Platforms built on Blockchain technology like PeakD, which runs on the Hive blockchain, offer interesting alternatives. These platforms have incentive structures that can potentially reward genuine human creativity over AI-generated content.

Could Proof of Stake mechanisms be used to bet against AI-generated content on decentralized platforms? Imagine a system where your rewards take a hit if your content is determined to be AI-generated. But then we’re back to the original question — how do we reliably make that determination? Could decentralized governance play a key role here?

PeakD uses reputation algorithms that penalize creators who overly rely on AI. They don’t get censored, but their reach and rewards may diminish when other creators identify their reputation scores. This creates a market-based solution rather than a technological or regulatory one.

The NFT Approach to Content Authentication

Some creators are experimenting with NFTs and blockchain verification to authenticate their work. Projects like the blockchain camera aim to verify that images were captured by real cameras, not generated by AI. While still experimental, these approaches represent creative solutions that work with the reality of AI rather than against it.

By incorporating Cryptocurrency and blockchain technology, we might create verifiable trails of authentic human creation, allowing consumers to make informed choices about the content they consume rather than trying to ban AI-generated material outright.

A Practical Path Forward

So what’s the pragmatic approach to dealing with AI-generated content? I propose these principles:

1. Embrace it: Companies should accept the fact the battle is about adaptation.
2. Focus on value-add: The question shouldn’t be “Was AI used?” but rather “Does this content provide value regardless of how it was created?”
3. Develop better attribution systems: We need robust systems for tracking and attributing the sources that AI models are trained on.
4. Create sustainable reward systems: Platforms need to reward content that audiences find valuable, whether human-created, AI-assisted, or AI-generated with human curation.
5. Educate consumers: Help people understand the nature of AI-generated content so they can make informed choices.

Conclusion

In this capitalistic economy where growth often trumps all other considerations, AI adoption in content creation was inevitable. Fighting against it is like trying to hold back the tide with your hands — exhausting and ultimately futile.

Instead, we should channel our energy toward building systems and platforms that harness AI’s capabilities while preserving the value of human creativity and insight. The future belongs not to those who try to detect and punish AI usage, but to those who figure out how to make AI and human creativity work together in ways that benefit everyone.

The drug war has taught us that prohibition rarely works when demand is high and supply is easy. The war on AI-generated content will likely teach us the same lesson. The question is: how quickly will we learn it, and what will we build instead?

Like the law enforcement agencies that have gradually shifted from pure prohibition to harm reduction in drug policy, perhaps it’s time for content platforms to shift from detection and punishment to adaptation and innovation.

What do you think? Is fighting AI content a losing battle, or are there effective ways to preserve the value of human creativity in an increasingly AI-powered world? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments.

---

If you liked this content I’d appreciate an upvote or a comment. That helps me improve the quality of my posts as well as getting to know more about you, my dear reader.

Muchas gracias!

Follow me for more content like this.

X | PeakD | Rumble | YouTube | Linked In | GitHub | PayPal.me | Medium

Down below you can find other ways to tip my work.

BankTransfer: "710969000019398639", // CLABE
BAT: "0x33CD7770d3235F97e5A8a96D5F21766DbB08c875",
ETH: "0x33CD7770d3235F97e5A8a96D5F21766DbB08c875",
BTC: "33xxUWU5kjcPk1Kr9ucn9tQXd2DbQ1b9tE",
ADA: "addr1q9l3y73e82hhwfr49eu0fkjw34w9s406wnln7rk9m4ky5fag8akgnwf3y4r2uzqf00rw0pvsucql0pqkzag5n450facq8vwr5e",
DOT: "1rRDzfMLPi88RixTeVc2beA5h2Q3z1K1Uk3kqqyej7nWPNf",
DOGE: "DRph8GEwGccvBWCe4wEQsWsTvQvsEH4QKH",
DAI: "0x33CD7770d3235F97e5A8a96D5F21766DbB08c875"