<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Writing on dhewi</title>
    <link>https://www.dhewi.co.uk/tags/writing/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Writing on dhewi</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.125.7</generator>
    <language>en-gb</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 11:43:32 +0100</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.dhewi.co.uk/tags/writing/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>An AI Writing Transparency Declaration</title>
      <link>https://www.dhewi.co.uk/posts/ai-writing-transparency-declaration/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 11:43:32 +0100</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.dhewi.co.uk/posts/ai-writing-transparency-declaration/</guid>
      <description>This, here, is a good exercise and analysis for any of us who write online (or write at all, I suppose, but for most of us that’s online).
Blink if you’re human
If you haven’t read it before reading this – and you should read it at some point, at least – it teases apart what could count as “writing with AI”, and argues that rather than either getting all ban-heavy, or requiring labelling of AI-written material, better simply for those of us who write for ourselves to be transparent about how we do what we do.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
