One in three top LinkedIn posts is now AI-generated. Which means two things: first, that sounding like an expert now proves nothing, and second, that your LinkedIn feed is now drowning in fake authority.
Pangram – the leading AI-detector – did an intersting analysis with unsurprising results:
1) 40 % of long LinkedIn articles flagged as fully AI-generated
2) LinkedIn is accountable for 62 % of all flagged AI content, even though it representet only 1/3 of scans.
What it already shows is that long writing is no longer scarce on LinkedIn, they became abundant – but what is missing for the reader is the evidence how real the mind / human behind an article actually is.
In other words: The risk is not the fake writing (which tools like Pangram can detect), but the fake authority behind it.
Zero marginal cost -> infinite polished posts -> synthetic authority inflation
For example, a high alpha strategic view on a specific subject previously required and thereby signaled competence. Now exactly these type of posts become increasingly meaningless — which discourages those with real competence to publish anything at all.
It is clear, that content as a category becomes meaningless and competence signalling will shift entirely to costly signalling: deals closed, decisions made, documented mistakes with consequences, forecasts that become timestamped in a blockchain before outcomes, etc.
What most on LinkedIn overlook: generic AI content without costly signalling will not only underperform, but because of detection tools (like Pangram) and with increasing audience skepticism (like myself), it becomes a negative reputational signal: this person wants authority without the cost of thought.
Some – myself or Paul Graham included – started blocking anyone commenting with AI slop below posts and articles.
Not only slop, but anything generic is becoming reputationally dangerous. Even senior executives, who built their career over decades, publishing interchangable insights will now signal less competence than an imperfect writer publishing a specific accountable observation.
Ergo? Treat LinkedIn engagement as a weaker evidence of expertise than ever before.
The important question for Nostr: How can we avoid becoming a protocol of AI generated slop?
Source:
https://www.pangram.com/blog/ai-in-your-feed
