<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Writing on Phillip Büchler</title><link>https://3b0988de.blog-6cm.pages.dev/tags/writing/</link><description>Recent content in Writing on Phillip Büchler</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><copyright>&amp;copy; 2022 &lt;a href="https://philipbuechler.ch/"&gt;Fime&lt;/a&gt;</copyright><lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://3b0988de.blog-6cm.pages.dev/tags/writing/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Judge the signature, not the tool</title><link>https://3b0988de.blog-6cm.pages.dev/posts/judge-the-signature/</link><pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://3b0988de.blog-6cm.pages.dev/posts/judge-the-signature/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;ldquo;You can tell that was written with AI.&amp;rdquo; In some professional circles that sentence ends the discussion, as if the author had handed in their professional pride together with the prompt.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I understand where it comes from. A wall of text that reads slightly off costs the writer ten seconds and the reader ten minutes. After the fifth one, people start judging the tool instead of the text. That&amp;rsquo;s a shortcut, but an understandable one.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>