I think there's probably some discussion about using AI to write fiction that should be had.

But.

Passing off your AI output as "human written" should be punished somehow. As a fiction reader, I don't care what ChatGPT has to say, even if you think you prompted it into a publishable story. I want to read stories written by humans, and I want to reliably be able to tell which are and which aren't, so I don't spend half my attention while reading trying to work out if this is an AI or not.

I have no clue how to make that come true. Part of me is sitting here thinking "I'm glad I'm old enough that I can spend the rest of my life reading fiction written before about 2020 and never run out of genuinely great human written stories."

It may come down to "showing your work". The post talks about how they investigated the two suspect submissions by asking them for evidence of their process, but none was forthcoming.

It may just start to become the norm for publishers to do this for all submissions, like checking references for a prospective employee.

I have very little physical evidence of any book I've ever worked on, but I'm sure I could find heaps of digital versions and notes. I hope this would be good enough although obviously it could be falsified by someone determined enough I guess (note to self, start writing notes by hand)

Technicality everyone can do that in perpetuity :)