Blogs Are Dead. I Am Writing One and Here Is Why.

Blogs are dead.

At least, that's what everyone says.

Currently with increasing AI capability, blogs seem almost useless.

AI can generate articles, blogs, and even entire books in seconds if you pay it plenty.

So the news-summary blogs are dead.

AI can also read official docs of any tools, frameworks, or libraries and spit out tutorials that are more up-to-date than most people can maintain.

So generic tutorial blogs are dead.

Everyone can ask AI, and it can answer them with absolute joy. Stack Overflow is dead (not officially dead yet).

If a person go against all those odd and still write a blog, who would read it?

It gets left untouched, decay like a rotten fruit on the ground, waiting to return to the nature.

Even if that fruit is noticed, picked up, and tasted, who's making sure that person will like it and come back for more?

Despite all of that, why do i decide to write one?

TL;DR

Takeaway: Blogging isn't about being read. It's about building a durable point of view and creating a linkable artifact of your thinking.

I write for myself first: to clarify what I believe and why.

If it helps others later, great. If not, still worth it.

The way to “compete with AI” is not speed. It's judgment, experience, and original artifacts.

When not to do this: If your only goal is quick traffic or profit, blogging is a slow bet.

What problem am I actually solving?

The problem isn't “no one read blogs”

The real problem is repeating myself.

I keep running into the same topics and giving the same explainations:

in conversation
in reviews
in future me debugging past me

A blog is my solution to that.

Not a publishing machine.

A memory, a stance, and a reference

Why blogging feels dead in 2026

1/ Generic content got commoditized

If your post is basically “the docs, but longer”, AI will beat you:

faster
cleaner
and more current

2/ Discovery doesn't happen by default

Even before AI, a new blog didn't magically get readers.

If you want an audience, distribution is the job:

sharing,
reposting,
building a network,
and being patient.

That's fine, but it's a separate decision

3/ The internet rewards engagement, not meaning

The algorithm wants dopamine, not depth.

So if you measure meaning by views, you will lost motivation fast.

Why i am writing anyway

Here's the reasoning ladder (so you can see how I got here):

Observation: I keep re-explaining the same ideas
Constraint: My time is limited and attention is scarce.
Principle: Writing once beat explaining forever
Decision: Publish my thinking as linkable artifacts
Result: I get clarity, and sometimes other people benefit too

That's enough meaning for me.

Okay, but how do I avoid writing human slop?

If a blog can be derived from docs + a LLM model, it's not worth writing.

So my filter is simple: what can't be cheaply generated

1. Judgement

Tradeoffs, decisions, "here's what i chose and why".

Not “How X works”

But: “why I picked X over Y under these constraints”

2. Experience

Scars, constraints, what failed, what surprised me.

AI can explain patterns.

It can't recreate the specific ways reality fought back

3. Synthesis

connecting ideas across domains

The useful stuff is often between categories:

engineering with product
UX with psychology
system with incentives

Synthesis is where “a take” becomes a “point of view”

4. Original artifact

benchmarks, code, checklists, frameworks, diagrams

A real artifact is harder to fake and easier to trust

5. Personality

humor, style, voice

Not “quirky for quirky's sake”, but a signal a human actually cared enough to think.

What this looks like in practice

Before/after: why a blog saves time

Before: someone asks the same question again, and I re-type the same answer.

After: I send a link and say: “Here read this”

That's not “content creation”

That's building reusable clarity

Tradeoff and boundaries

Tradeoff 1: If I want readers, I must market

This is the hard truth:

a good post doesn't guarantee discovery
and a small audience doesn't mean low quality

I'm not optimizing for reach right now.

If I ever want reach, I'll treat distribution as it's own workflow

Tradeoff 2: Publishing can create pressure

Blog aren't personal notes

Once it's public, you might feel it must be:

correct
complete
always up to date

That pressure kills writing habits

So I'm choosing a healthier bar:

small post, clear claims, honest boundaries

Tradeoff 3: Not everything should be a blog post

Some writing belongs in private notes.

Some belongs in docs.

Some belongs nowhere

My rule: publish only what I'd want to link to six month from now

What I'm doing next

For now, my goal is simple:: building consistency without audience pressure

Write short, single-claim posts.
Keep them skimmable
Add at least one real artifact or tradeoff
Let the archive compound quietly

If a few people read it, great.

If no one reads it, it still did it's job: it make my thinking durable.

And honestly? That's enough.

This post was sparked by a thread I opened on r/ExperiencedDevs. Thanks to everyone who shared their perspectives. I learned a lot from it, and I wish you the best.