AI Writing: Should Authors Be Concerned?

[@matthewgleason7495]

As a writer I'm more concerned about people not trusting new work out of fear of it being low quality AI drivel than the possibility of this technology actually replacing writers in any meaningful way. Writing doesn't work if it's not about perspective and experience. The unique voices of other thinking beings are what draw readers/audiences in. People want media that means or conveys something on some level and isn't entirely automated/formulaic. No matter how good AI gets unless it becomes truly sentient it will never produce anything with meaning. That's not some grand philosophical take it's a fundamental part of how people practically engage with art.

[@juststartwriting]

Well said.

[@depressedasfook2893]

Unfortunately that's not the case. Imitatated meaning is perceived the same as actual meaning. In the same way someone can absolutely fake emotions and experiences in writing or even music. An ai absolutely can copy that, in fact we already see music ai that copy voice cracks, breaths, etc there are plankton (from sponge Bob) covers of songs that sound similar I quality to the original or better in some cases. The "soul" we read or hear is absolutely manufacturable, ai has already won writing, poetry, and art competitions, humans have already been wrongfully disqualified assuming they used ai. It's already there, and will only get better. I can't say it's a definitive, but I got my degree in computer science and programming (from PSU) at the end of spring term, I can say it isn't hard to see happening

[@matthewgleason7495]

@depressedasfook2893 I really disagree that any sort of sustainable (key word here) imitation of personality/real experience will work for people in anything resembling the long term. For one I think the fact of what the source of something is does matter to people. Fiction is the truth in the lies. I don't think most people want to remove personhood from what many of us spend the majority of our time engaging with. Furthermore the push for people to draw authentically from lived experience when making art has become huge in recent years abd tells me that there are already prominent forces in the market to push back against AI creations. That said just as soon as there are people created through AI I'd be fascinated to engage with any of their art. Obviously I can't be fully objective here but I am trying to at least seriously consider the idea of AI art/writing. I won't at all make the claim it will never be good enough for anyone but I personally am not of the view humans are so easily replaced in the grand scheme of things. I'm a little excited for where the pushback against feared irrelevance will lead creators in the future. I could see certain trends of modernism/postmodernism such as lack of specific meaning becoming particularly unpopular for awhile as people try to do the opposite of what the machines are doing. I could also see new interest in nontraditional narrative structures emerging for the same reason. That's just a bit of speculation on my part. To summarize I think in some way AI is a threat but not one that will totally unseat human/person made art as one of the primary endeavors of civilization.

[@SuperBeanson]

Hearing the news that Chat GPT has written a GoT novel initially made me panic. I've seen Chatbot attempts at writing creative long form before and it's uniformly crap. But, could this be the moment the AI has broken the walls of its creative limitations... ... In a word, no. I can assure every worried writer that it hasn't. Read the first few thousand words of this effort and you will understand. Apart from the terrible writing style (every noun has an accompanying adjective, every description struggles under its own weight, etc) the narrative is frankly laughable. There is no direction, no compelling hook, no novel circumstance; no plot! And you can see why. There's no creative thought directing it. It's just the concatenation of the result of a series of queries, and in order to generate the insane length of this 'novel' (a million words) these queries have been repeated ad nauseam. It opens with Tyrion on a boat: he stares out at the waves in anguish; someone comes and talks to him in florid purple-prose about his anguish; he responds in wry fashion before turning back to survey the horizon. Anon comes another who repeats this first interaction using slightly different words; our hero responds in a manner similar to his previous response. A third time comes around: a third character swapped in. And then a forth... Jeezuz Not only is there no narrative thrust in these opening exchanges, there is no ongoing thought. The process is laid bare. Obviously the opening query (written, or at least selected, by the human author in the 'outline' of this 'novel') went something like 'write about Tyrion on a boat in anguish and talking to friends' then: do it again, do it again, do it again... This is the (flaccid) power of a reiterated query. You can generate filler no doubt, but without the authorial nous to direct the narrative it's a relentlessly dull list of variations on a theme. We WILL get automated novel writing, but only when GENERAL AI is on line. And when that happens the 'game-over' for us novelists will be the least of our concerns. So rest easy; we only go down when civilization does! For now, Chatbots can only produce an unengaging mass of semi-connected words in the style of a pre-teen with a automated thesaurus which, in this case, after a few pages will defeat the most abject GoT fan.

[@matthewgleason7495]

Commenting before I've seen the rest of the video but I just wanted to say that Martin really hasn't been that negative towards fanfic. He's just expressed a lack of interest in engaging with it. I wish he was more positive about it but at the very least I get him not wanting to read fanfics of his own stuff. Still not the same as AI stealing and imitating human creativity. Now back to watching your video.

[@danceswithchihuahuas7092]

If you use AI, then you are not a writer. I also feel that using most of the AI tools is disqualifying as well. The arguments that are normally employed against AI artistry (AI is using other people’s work without permission; AI art is not creating anything new; AI art is not very good or is flawed; people will be out of work) are not good arguments because they are either not true or are will no longer apply in the future. I certainly hope that if these arguments become invalid that we will all be happy with everything being created by AI. (Everything will be created by AI because it will be the least resource intensive. There will still be humans that create art, but we will rarely see it.) The problem I have is that AI “artists” are employing minimal effort to create and therefore are not Becoming. They didn’t think those thoughts on paper or canvas, they didn’t agonize over whether a single lonely word conveyed the correct emotions. They don’t have to: the AI can give them ideas. You need to experience (and overcome) writer’s block to be a good writer. AI is stolen valor. I spent 30 years becoming a better writer and never had to use AI once. I will never recognize someone who inputs a prompt or edits with AI as a writer. You haven’t earned it. True masterpieces are never easy.

[@quixotiq]

So say we all.

[@imaginepageant]

"If you use AI, then you are not a writer" is a dangerously broad statement. I agree that if you use AI to actually write for you, you are not a writer... but there are many ways AI can be a useful tool for writers. For example, instead of spending potential hours sifting through baby name websites, name generators, historical census data, and so on, I can ask ChatGPT to give me names common in the USA in the 1940s that start with the letter M and are Latin in origin, and BAM-chances are I'll find the perfect name for a character in a couple of minutes, max. In that sense, all AI does is compile the data you would've compiled yourself, but in much less time, leaving you more time to actually write. I utilized it a lot with a recent short story set in late 19th century Britain, asking for antiquated and/or British ways to say certain phrases; this saved me a ton of time researching the Victorian era, which I used instead to... write! I also use ChatGPT as a thesaurus to help me find the perfectly flavored word-again, I could probably eventually find it on Thesaurus.com, but after a lot more searching. When used in these ways and other similar ones, ChatGPT does the same work as other tools and resources that writers have been using for ages... just a lot faster. Saying a writer who uses AI in these ways isn't a writer is just plain wrong.

[@EnigmaScience]

Tbh AI makes me want to quit creative field altogether and switch to the things which give money and satisfaction right here and right now. If there is no such thing as intrinsic value and a human can't create anything better than a machine, if nothing but money matters - might as well give on creating and consume to death if it is equally meaningless.

[@The_Open_Book]

It becomes unquestionably theft when it is processing and mimicking a specific creator (the ethics of the collage process to be discussed separately. This is a pointed attack on one's creative livelihood). Like what we saw with AI art, when you mimic a creator's style to the point that people will choose to not hire them, this is the same. Why wait for Martin's vision, why care if it's his words? Another way to look at this is like tracing. If you don't credit the artist, you will be condemned by the community. It doesn't matter that all you did was outline a body structure and add everything else new yourself (color, background) you still took what you needed to even start at that point. Foundation is just as important as the end product, because without that, you'd have nothing.

[@juststartwriting]

Tracing is a really good way to put it

[@imaginepageant]

To be fair, we have waited for Martin's vision. For 13 years. At this point, I'd take an AI-written WoW because GRRM's never going to do it himself.

[@TimRG]

I love AI, especially for writers when used correctly. I use it to brainstorm ideas for my novels, which is the best way to use AI. Using AI has helped solve a lot of problems that would have taken me a lot longer to solve on my own. Having something to bounce ideas off of at my fingers tips is awesome. As for those who are having AI write the novel for them are just lazy and trying to cash grab. Eventually, this will backfire on them. We will start seeing AI checks being used in the submission process. Universities are using them now for papers and there should be hard consequences for those who try to pass off AI works.

[@juststartwriting]

I think this is ultimately where it will end up. I like the term "co-pilot" basically adding to the strength of tools that already exist like grammarly and pro-writing aid. The one thing I wish it could do efficiently and accurately is research. I spent so much time just reading articles about wheat...to get a summary? wonderful.

[@davesolo4352]

Exactly!

[@The_Open_Book]

I wonder at what point submission processing checks won't work anymore though? If AI are this capable and quick, won't the internet get flooded with every possible phrase/wording to the point where nothing you write could ever be "original"... don't mind me. Just spiraling ;P

[@juststartwriting]

The ironic thing is that currently the way they're considering doing this is actually by using AI. In Universities there is essentially...anti-ai ai? I don't know quite enough about it yet but it's interesting.@@The_Open_Book

[@depressedasfook2893]

I agree in the originality of things. As someone that works with and got my degree to work with ai and programing in general, i highly doubt truly original work can be created by ai. That said I doubt truly original work can really be generated by humans either. Art is the expression of experience or emotion therefor limited by those that are not unique in order for it to be well received by others. This means 80% of art is pretty copy friendly. A genre is in itself a primary key for what your going to get. As ai gets better and better, I think it's extremely likely it will be able to copy emotion. Manufactored emotion and meaning is somthing we as humans already do and consume without issue. Many many many writers artists etc speak on experiences nothing like their own based on their consume knowledge. This, is basically how ai works. It will probably take some time before it can do it to an indistinguishable level as it pertains to generation, specifically for long form text. But as far as music and visual art and even short form writing like poetry. Ai has won in competitions and polls. It can better represent our feelings than humans because it can recognize the patterns in a million love songs that a human never could. It can imitate the breaks in voices that we associate with meaning because songs with a percentage of that weighted on different words get more play time. I mean look up ai plankton cover of a song it can often match the original in quality and depth even if you know it's procedural and fake and it's using a comedy character from a children's show. I think we as humans over attribute our talent and uniqueness in art, and I think we vastly overestimate our individuality. Ai is really just pattern recognition software diled up to a thousand, outside of things that are deeply unique to the individual (and therefore not neerly as profitable) ai should in the future be able to match and unfortunately even exceed our own capability to express via different meduims. I think given enough time it'll be more of a Renaissance for art or art will become deeply personal I will see a dramatic change in the way that we do art.

[@BooksForever]

Your videos are characteristically flawless, so given the atypical audio/video glitch about GRR Martin in the opening moments, am I to gather that you’ve delivered the goods and yet KZbin dropped the hammer and… how do I put this so that I don’t run similarly afoul… essentially has a standard that disallows a user to *ahem* take someone out to the ballgame but not like during the seventh inning stretch? Looking forward to your insight.

[@juststartwriting]

I'll have to take a look, flawless is a pursuit that often ends in tragedy but I do try to at least make all my videos watchable and as clean of errors as I can.

[@BooksForever]

@@juststartwriting - it’s like a split-second worth dialogue were noticeably excised. “take OUT” seems to be what’s missing… at the 10 second mark.

[@Tom-qo9xu]

I highly recommend Robert Miles AI Safety here on KZbin for no nonsense, no hype, from a real expert in the field of AI

[@HasteWriting]

How do I upvote this comment thrice?

[@Tom-qo9xu]

@HasteWriting I take your a fan of Robert Miles' humble rationalism as well 🫡

[@HasteWriting]

@@Tom-qo9xu Very much so!

[@trapsaltnburn]

My feelings on AI generated anything are really mixed. I think AI has the potential to be or to be made into some truly useful tools. The two biggest issues I see (and I'm speaking in very, very broad strokes here) seem to boil down to the ethics around where the information that's being fed to the AI is coming from, and the fact that there are always cheap, greedy people out there who see nothing but dollar signs and numbers, and aren't thinking long-term. I don't have solutions for any of these things, and it makes it hard to know where to draw the line. I've messed around with AI chat a little, mostly to generate writing prompts, but even that makes me feel a little skeezy. It's frustrating.

[@ngarcia2116]

It’s a Song of Ice and Fire that it was taken from, Winds of Winter is just the title of the next book. Other than that, I agree with you.

[@juststartwriting]

Thank you for the correction!

[@farhanjazli]

I know this is an old video, but I use AI to organize and outline my ideas before I write them. As a second language speaker, it helps me with grammar and spelling corrections.

[@juststartwriting]

AI as a tool isn't really that much different than what we've been using for ages. AI as replacement is the issue. Also be very careful because AI is known to hallucinate which might be difficult to catch. Think of it this way: AI will sooner create something incorrect, than provide you with no answer. It's an inherent problem in all AI models atm where they will hallucinate falsehoods.

[@ericlewisauthor]

FFS, I can't even give my books away. Now I get to be stomped on by bots. Great.

[@The_Open_Book]

maybe we need to stop letting AI be the writers and start using them to be our agents? lol

[@juststartwriting]

Don't give up. Your books are worth it. Your art is worth it.

[@marinemarcusbradley]

A lot of different industries make this same argument in different ways at different times, but this feels different. Its also preposterous to police. You can combine any number of styles to make a completely unique, and yet still patchworked piece of writing. A story written in the style of J.R.R. Martin and J.R.R. Tolkien for example defies any attempt to tell where one ends and the other begins (save for the heightened use of the word 'fellowship').

[@obelusyt]

Don't give yourself an epistemological headlock by comparing distant subjects, in the end the validity will be between ordinary and extraordinary. Between popular writers and formal writers there is no antagonism, offer and demand is the rule, so the readers will have the last word. BTW Jake Paul's autobiography is a bestseller, with great reviews.

[@IonBlaze1]

Aibeardflynn haha. Good topic for video. I think the gist you said, Ai is limited to the box it's shown. Humans can think outside of the box. Ai will also likely struggle with how to tastefully put the story ingredients together. I don't think Ai can replace creativity-based jobs but it can be a helper tool.

[@juststartwriting]

I'm going to spin off a 3rd channel called aibeardflynn now...

[@eyezerocool]

Sadly this is the future? We are like the phone operaters of the 50s?

[@paramedicchrisbookseries]

This is really helpful, a new subject to myself. Really interesting.

[@luluzyz]

I think writers should be concerned, because AI now is not even that advanced, imagine the future of AI.

[@davidwright6839]

If you create something based on something someone else produced and try to sell it using their identity, that is the crime of counterfeiting. If you create something in someone else's style, but you don't pretend to be that person, that is the sincerest form of flattery. This is true whether the mimic is a human or a machine. From the standpoint of the Universe, there's no difference. The dominant species' idea that humans are "special" is a subjective bias. Don't confuse the purpose of art with the purpose of capitalism.

[@ashwinnmyburgh9364]

Wait...RedBeardFlynn????! I didn't know that you were a writer as well!

[@juststartwriting]

Haha yes, I am! Hello!

[@hexesandheroes]

If it isn't monetized, which i highly doubt it is, then it seems more like a beta test.

[@juststartwriting]

Oh it absolutely is a beta test. The creator gave it all out for free. It's less about this one individual and more about what could become a looming problem with hard to answer questions for years to come.

[@MrRosebeing]

You should only really be concerned if you make money from your writing. Most writers don't, so they have no need to be worried. Just write your story/novel and AI can write its own from the dross that is already out there.

[@juststartwriting]

This...is...what? AI is using those same writers who *aren't getting paid* to train it's writing.

[@TroyTheCatFish]

Thank you 🙏