In a world where AI can seemingly generate anything and everything, there is a stigma, or Scarlet Letter, attached to anything and everything it does.
No matter how good the output is or how bad, the minute someone hears “this was created with AI,” a certain percentage of people immediately discount its usefulness, its quality, and sometimes even its legitimacy. The tool becomes the story, not the outcome. The label matters more than the work itself.
I don’t know how long this Scarlet Letter effect will last, but I’m confident of one thing: it will pass.
The reason I’m so sure is simple. The rate of improvement in AI-generated work product so wildly outpaces the rate of improvement in human-generated work that it’s only a matter of time before the quality gap flips for most of the tasks we actually care about. When that happens, arguing about whether something was “AI-made” will feel as dated as complaining about whether something came off an assembly line instead of a workbench.
This all feels strangely familiar to me.
When I was a kid, “Made in Japan” was shorthand for cheap, flimsy knockoffs. Tin toys, questionable electronics, and yes, those old Godzilla movies that looked like a guy stomping on cardboard cities. You didn’t buy Japanese goods for quality. You bought them because they were cheap, and you assumed they wouldn’t last.
Then something funny happened. Japan became synonymous with precision, craftsmanship, and design excellence. Cars. Electronics. Manufacturing processes that the rest of the world scrambled to emulate. The stigma evaporated.
The Scarlet Letter moved.
For years after that, “Made in China” wore the same red A. Inferior. Disposable. Mass-produced junk. Until it wasn’t. Until Chinese electronics, vehicles, and consumer goods met or exceeded global standards. Today, much of what powers the modern world comes from China, and most people don’t think twice about it.
AI is following that exact arc.
We are already seeing it play out in software development. When people first started generating code with AI, it was pretty bad. Syntax errors. Logical gaps. Hallucinated APIs. Anyone who tried it early remembers rolling their eyes and muttering, “See, this is why humans matter.”
But AI turned out to be a fast learner.
Today, many engineers will tell you that AI-generated code is roughly on par with average human-generated code. Not elite code. Not the work of the best engineers in the world. But solid, usable, production-adjacent output. And here’s the part that really matters: human code quality is a relatively steady line. AI code quality keeps compounding.
I know what you’re going to say. AI can’t code as well as the best developers can. I agree. Today. The real question is not about today. It’s about tomorrow, and the day after that.
We’ve already reached the point where AI is responsible for a significant percentage of new code being written. As that becomes normal, the stigma around AI-generated code fades. Not because people suddenly love AI, but because results matter more than ideology. The Scarlet Letter gets lighter with every commit.
The same dynamic is playing out in written content.
We’re now seeing what I’d call a “Scarlet Letter anti-pattern,” where websites proudly proclaim that their content is “100% human” and that “no AI was used.” They wear it like a badge of honor, as if the absence of a tool somehow guarantees quality.
I find that quaint. And if I’m being honest, a little arrogant.
Yes, there are still craftspeople who make things by hand, one at a time. That kind of work has value. But mass production is one of the greatest success stories of the last century. It didn’t eliminate craftsmanship. It changed where craftsmanship mattered.
“Produced by AI” will be one of the biggest success stories of this century.
As someone who writes a lot and has been evolving alongside AI for a while now, I’ll be clear about what AI can and can’t do. It’s not writing the next great American novel anytime soon. But it will absolutely write your next blog post, your next email, your next marketing asset, and a good chunk of your business communications.
And when I say “it will write,” I don’t mean AI operating in a vacuum. That’s the part people still misunderstand. AI output is only as good as the person telling it what to produce. The human is still the spark. To paraphrase Billy Joel, AI doesn’t start the fire.
Good prompts reflect clear thinking. Good direction reflects taste and intent. A strong writer using AI will still produce better prose than a weak writer using the same tools. AI amplifies ability. It doesn’t magically replace it.
Beyond words, we see the same stigma attached to artistic creativity. Synthetic music. Synthetic art. Synthetic video. All of it gets dismissed as lesser, soulless, or slop, as if it should wear a bold red A wherever it appears.
Two things I’ve learned here.
First, most critics haven’t actually listened to the music, watched the videos, or really looked at the art. When you do, you realize something uncomfortable: a lot of it is pretty damn good. And it’s getting better every day.
Second, just like with code and writing, AI-generated creative work is only as good as the human behind it. A skilled musician will produce better AI-assisted music than someone who doesn’t understand music at all. A designer with taste will create better AI-assisted visuals than someone who lacks an eye. Tools don’t replace mastery. They reward it.
Is AI going to produce the next Picasso today? No. But for the graphics we use on social media, for marketing materials, for short-form entertainment and visual storytelling, it’s already more than good enough. And again, it keeps improving.
Another argument I hear all the time is that we’re being overwhelmed by AI-generated content. On this point, I actually agree with the feeling, if not the conclusion. The flood is real. It’s exhausting. It feels like too much.
But let’s be honest. Content overload didn’t start with AI. AI just poured gasoline on a fire that was already burning.
Right now, for many people, AI creation feels like a kid with a new bike. They ride it everywhere. They show it to everyone. They don’t know when to stop. That phase will pass. Novelty always fades. What will remain is the need to rethink how we filter, curate, and prioritize information.
Here’s the irony. AI will help us do that too.
So here’s my Shimmy take. This Scarlet Letter phase of AI is a momentary mile marker on a very long superhighway. In the not-too-distant future, the idea that AI-generated output is inherently inferior will feel laughable. The “made by AI” label will fade into the background, just like so many “made in” labels before it.
Those who embrace what AI can do will move faster, create more, and compete at a different level. Those who don’t will find themselves living below the AI poverty line.
The choice is yours. Where do you want to live?
