I have launched a new website/experiment: How we use technology to predict the future. Whilst it does what it says on the tin, there is an underlying experiment comparing AI-driven content with Human-generated content.
Comparing AI content with Human content
The new site has three principal authors. John Wanjohi is a real person and is a great content writer based in Kenya. I enjoy his alliterative writing style and great storytelling. He is also working with content briefs using Inlinks to ensure his content is rich and optimized. I strongly encourage you to read his stuff! It’s well researched and informative. He’s also a content writing gun for hire, so if you need a writer, I can recommend him.
The second real writer is “Dai Jones“. Dai is an AI-Driven alter ego. Dai creates content around a keyword and content plan (generated by Inlinks, again), but the content itself is autogenerated. This means that the content plans INFORMS the AI and will hopefully create better and more focused articles that use pure GPT3 or GPT4 content writing algorithms. Dai is only semi-artificial because the content gets generated based on concepts that already rank for a keyword. Then I, as a human (until I can entrust this to a hired hand), will go through the content and make it at least plausible, if not necessarily entirely accurate.
The third writer will be me, writing as Jenny. Jenny is because this project was initially entrusted to a “we’ll do it all for you” kind of operation, which seemed to take my money and run. That’s not really fair… they did the logo and changed the theme and switched Yoast to Ranksense and other things to keep me on my toes. Anyway – they never wrote any content, so I decided not to let the site go to waste.
What is the purpose?
Well – I HOPE the site will create exciting and engaging content people want to read. If they do, I will most likely add affiliate links to it or otherwise start to monetize it. But the bigger question is a long-running question… is the AI content going to do better or worse over time? By separating the content by the author, I should be able to get some insights. The logic will not be clear – all the posts are different subjects and the GPT algorithms will probably improve over time – as will Google’s algorithms in relation to automated content. The insights, though, should help me to understand Google’s take on AI-driven content. Google’s view may change over time, and that may be reflected in updates… so if the pages created by John fare markedly differently from those produced by Dai in an update, we’ll have a pretty good idea that AI-driven content was part of the update. we will also get an idea as to whether the update was positive or negative to AI-driven content.