I’ve been on the fence about openly talking about A.I. at length because I wasn’t really sure where I stood. I mean, I didn’t like that people were writing books over the course of a weekend with A.I. Came off as a bad sign as the future of art made by actual humans. Still, I heard people saying using it for editing was helpful. Well, I think I’ve finally figured a few things out for myself.
First, I do understand how A.I. can be a useful tool in terms of editing. Seems like it can tell you if something doesn’t feel natural or whatever. Almost like getting the opinion of another human, but it still lacks the nuance and finesse that comes with having an organic brain. I’m sure it can make sure you have spelling consistency and won’t repeat words too often. On the other hand, I can’t be certain it won’t have a hemorrhage with fantasy names like spellchecker does. You would still have to plug in enough information there for the A.I. to come up with something close to your dreams. I would hope, but I guess a person can just put in ‘Write a fantasy story about a farmer becoming a great wizard’ and then publish what comes out.
That’s my worry on this whole A.I. thing, especially when I read about companies training their programs on books. There was a big kerfuffle over one A.I. and I found out that a few of my Windemere books were fed to this thing. I really don’t like that because it means versions of what I wrote can be puked out into another story, but I wouldn’t have any clue or way to stop it. An A.I. can’t really make anything original because it can only work with what it’s already been given. That means, the same stories, characters, twists, and everything will be around. Readers get on a human author’s back for coming off as something else, so A.I. won’t do any better.
Yet, I have a bad feeling people won’t care. Having a book written by A.I. is going to be a novelty, which will be used to overshadow repeated plots or lackluster writing. I haven’t read any A.I. stuff, but I can’t imagine it would have the true emotion that a human can push into their writing. Something will be lacking unless these programs are designed to emulate emotions to realistic levels. Feeding them enough information could do that, but I don’t know how truly effective a sad scene will be from something that has never known sorrow. ‘Write what you know’ would go out the window as far as emotional scenes are concerned.
Another aspect that I think about is how there will still be human authors, but there won’t be many. I feel like those will be the ones who are already at the top and those who know others. Indie authors are barely a thing now, but A.I. could wipe them out, which means not many new faces. That is extreme, but I can see there being less at the very least. Why would publishers who are in it for money want to bother with a human author when they can grab an A.I. and crank something out? There is a sense of artistic integrity, but I can’t always be certain that’s a universal interest.
Honestly, I kind of dancing around my biggest fear: The removal of human expression and history. I think art is one the oldest and most essential aspects of humanity. Our species were making cave paintings to depict events, but they were still art. It feels like all artistic mediums began as a way to pass on knowledge and history to new generations. If A.I. takes art away then we are going to lose something. Humans need art whether they realize it or not. If they aren’t creating it, they’re indulging or utilizing it in some way. The clothes we wear, the homes we live in, and everything else in our lives have some artistic aesthetic. Why have A.I. take that from our species?
As I said, I know it can be a useful tool, which is fine. Yet, I can also see how those who are more interested in money would uses it crank out art with no soul. Remember years ago when you have authors putting out 99 cent books every few days with no editing and hastily made covers? The ones who saw the indie author boom and decided to make some quick cash then vanish. I feel A.I. books will be worse because you can’t shame a program into going away. Those behind it aren’t going to be the types to look at comments or care as long as they get their money and possible series/movie deal. Am I being pessimistic? Probably. I just have trouble thinking it’s a good thing that A.I. is being used more for art, research (critical thinking skills), and everything other than the mundane things you simply have to do to survive. As the image says, I want A.I. to do my laundry or clean my bathroom instead of writing my books.
Legends of Windemere 
I figure eventually they will come back to us when everything begins to look too cookie cutter.
As far as it not using the same word over and again…I was using chat gpt to try and put together a lesson for my kids for school. The thing used “arbitrary” 8 times in two paragraphs.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I hope you’re right on the first point. Weird that A.I. did the word thing, but I guess it depends on its training. Finding out tons of Amazon books were grabbed to teach an A.I. made me think these programs were better.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Admittedly sometimes I just pick a fight with AI for the entertainment.
LikeLike
Nothing wrong with that. If it wants to imitate humans then it should receive the same abuse we get.
LikeLike
I think it can be a useful tool for research and checking things, but should only take the role of an assistant. We talk about human creativity, not AI creativity.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s where I feel things get dangerous. People let it do research then let it do more. I’ve also found that some of the information the forced A.I. isn’t true.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think that is true. It can be a gateway drug and it does make mistakes, but I guess that is the point of reducing it to an assistant. That doesn’t remove our responsibility to check our assistants work and verify sources.
LikeLike
True. Though I worry about publishers using it to crank out trend stuff. They just need to proofread and send out. Even the art ends up being A.I.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I did have the experience of reading a book from Amazon that was incredibly repetitive in its phrasing and structure. We said this seems like AI, then one chapter ended with something like “if you would like me too… “ in the classic vein of AI. An annoying experience. A very banal read.
LikeLike
Didn’t know about that A.I. issue.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I get that people think AI can do things faster. But as someone whose books were illegally used to train AI, I’m not much in favor of an author using it to create a manuscript and then calling it something he or she “wrote.” I know many authors whose books were used as well who definitely are against this. I’m not saying AI can’t be used for some aspects. But a would-be author can’t develop the critical thinking that’s needed to produce a novel if he or she depends on AI to do the thinking for him/her. Writing takes instinct. It is like developing a muscle. There are no shortcuts to muscle development.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A bunch of mine got used too. I heard of AI being trained for other things by being fed previous information. Didn’t cross my mind that books would be used. It makes me wonder if there’s an AI story out there with clear aspects of Windemere in it.
LikeLike
There is an old saying that if the only tool you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail. AI is a tool, an author needs many tools and not one to use as a crutch. I use AI. It is kind of like having a decent assistant, but you have to fact check it. I have never had it write me a sentence. I did have it check all the puzzles in Article V.
We have a mutual follower who will probably take this post as her personal soapbox. She tends to not read what was written and make generalizations. This is a very relevant topic and more folks need to be talking about it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Curious to know who the follower is, but I guess I’ll find out the hard way. It’s a week long topic too.
The thing that comes to my mind is that many who do this aren’t authors. They’re people who might not even read, but think AI books are easy sources of money. It reminds me of the 99 cent books that people used to crank out every few days. No editing, messy format, weird cover, and 5-star reviews within hours by bots and friends.
LikeLike
I use AI for research. I do check on the feedback but it is usually correct with a few exceptions. I think as AI gets more sophisticated a reader won’t be able to tell the difference between a live author and a bot. I join you in being concerned about what this could mean to authors. Other jobs will be affected, too. I know there are plenty of software engineers who will be out of work after AI replaces them
LikeLiked by 1 person
AI is being suggested to replace teachers too. Robots at least. I can’t imagine how much of a mess that will be.
LikeLike