Pierre-Thomas Eckert, a researcher and co-founder of the collective Balance ton Claude, has been examining the possibility that a book by Thélyson Orélien was generated by artificial intelligence. Eckert, who holds a doctorate in moral philosophy and is a researcher in meta-ethics, co-founded the collective with Samuel Fitoussi and other internet users. The group aims to address the growing concern about AI-generated content and its potential impact on the quality of academic and literary work. Initially, the members of Balance ton Claude remained anonymous to focus on factual analysis, but Eckert now believes that revealing his identity will help clarify the collective's motivations. Eckert is particularly concerned about how AI affects academic production. He points out that academia is built on the assumption that authors are honest and that their work is original. However, the rise of large language models (LLMs)—advanced AI systems that generate text—makes it harder to tell whether a text was written by a person or a machine. This blurring of lines could lead to situations similar to the Sokal affair, a famous case in which a physicist submitted a deliberately nonsensical paper to a sociology journal to highlight flaws in academic peer review. Eckert also emphasizes the moral and intellectual value of the research process itself, not just the final results. He warns that relying on AI to generate academic texts might weaken important qualities like rigor, precision, and integrity. He references philosopher Eric Schwitzgebel, who has argued that there is a cognitive difference between reading and writing. According to Eckert, AI-generated content might subtly change the meaning of words, which could affect the quality of academic writing. While Eckert acknowledges that AI can be a helpful tool for generating ideas, exploring research topics, or clarifying complex concepts, he cautions against using it to create full academic texts. He notes that some professors are already using AI in ways that might damage the credibility of academic work. He also warns of a broader risk: the gradual transfer of intellectual responsibility and cognitive tasks from humans to AI, which could have long-lasting and potentially irreversible consequences.