I don't care. If anything in what you posted as your story was not written/plotted/developed by you, there needs to be credit.
Should we allow for AI-generated fiction writing?
- Thread starter Sgt_G
- Start date
Semantics.
So, he's not a full-time translator. Gotcha.
And I challenge you to tell any translator there's nothing he does that a machine can't do better.
There's still a great deal of legal debate, and it is far from established law. That's why all those people were submitting opinions in the first place. And I am pretty sure the AG lawsuit will not fail.
Two things:
1) We're not talking about the inevitable changing of technology that humanity has dealt with throughout history. We're talking about basically eliminating creativity itself.
2) In order to do so, authors like me are expected to happily hand over our copyrighted materials to build these facsimile machines.
Should you credit your grammar book, your spell check program, Purdue Owl for creating your work cited page or table of context or index?
The problem people are having here is in the idea that someone else may be benefiting from a creation they didn't put the same work into a everyone else. That, people feel, is unfair. This is about fairness, not about creativity. We read that someone has simply put a prompt and a few parameters into an AI writer and we feel ripped-off. "Hey, why should that guy get kudos for nothing when other people slave away for months, even years, actually creating something? We don't really have what is referred to in the legal world as, standing. It doesn't take away from or work, it doesn't trivialize our creativity or even cut into our profits. We just don't like the idea of it. It feels... unfair.
Except, we could do it too. We could be "that guy." The only thing that's stopping us is our desire to actually write what we create.
-Will
That's not the problem I have with it.
I don't care about "fairness". My feeling is, if you aren't good enough to write something without an AI crutch, your writing won't attract much of an audience anyway. It's like the difference between going to Ruth's Chris or Chili's.
My problem with it is the way studios are already trying to use it to put writers out of work. Why do you think AI was such a sticking point in the strikes last year? As such, I am vehemently opposed to any attempt to popularize it, or to equate its output with the authors it is cannibalizing.
But we’re not. Creativity in humans will still exist. We’re talking about new avenues of creativity for those that chose to use it.
That's not a new avenue for creativity.
I suppose it would depend on how you use it. Let's say you use AI for a writing prompt. Okay, fine. But if you tell AI to write a story for you? That's not creativity.
These workers are out of a job too. Their strikes have not been heeded, and automobiles, as well as other goods and services done by computers are keeping prices down.
I'm not saying that's a good thing. I actually think lower prices aren't necessarily better. Economically, it isn't viable to reduce the work force. It will just cause inflation and greater economic disparity. However, the economy will always seek to level out, even as the pursuit of profits continues to attempt to tilt the scales. However, in the overall picture, a few out of work writers probably won't have the impact of all those out of work factory workers.
-Will
These workers are out of a job too. Their strikes have not been heeded, and automobiles, as well as other goods and services done by computers are keeping prices down.
I'm not saying that's a good thing. I actually think lower prices aren't necessarily better. Economically, it isn't viable to reduce the work force. It will just cause inflation and greater economic disparity. However, the economy will always seek to level out, even as the pursuit of profits continues to attempt to tilt the scales. However, in the overall picture, a few out of work writers probably won't have the impact of all those out of work factory workers.
-Will
I agree with you. Our attempts to automate everything into oblivion have disastrous side effects. But I also think it's an apple and oranges situation.
AI does not function without my and other's intellectual property. They're not just taking my job, they're taking what beings to me to do it.
That's why Meta was trying to buy Simon and Schuster off of Paramount. There's only so far their AI programs can go without the intellectual property of others. That's also what exposes the lie that it is fair use. I can write a fantasy story without ever having read a fantasy novel. But AI can't. It has to have that material programmed into it to function properly.
So no, we should not sit back and idly accept such a thing as inevitable.
I struggle with writing some things, but want to be able to include them.
Problem: I can't write decent sword fight scenes, and my story requires sword fight scenes.
Solution A: Get an AI program to write them for me.
Solution B: Ask people who know how to do sword fighting for help, to understand the various aspects of this kind of combat. It's not something that can take a 5-minute explanation, and even though I spent 12 years in the SCA watching people fight, I've never done it myself.
Question: Which solution should I go with in order to present my story to readers and have a clear conscience and pride in my achievement? Understand that it's not only the fight mechanics that matter. There are characters doing the fight, and I want the fight to happen for a reason that is part of their character development. Can an AI help with that?
I doubt it. An AI could provide the mechanics of a sword right, but it can't do diddly-squat for the character development, because the characters live in my head and (so far) exist in a word processor, a brief mention here and there on a couple of gaming forums, and in physical notebooks, on the backs of envelopes, etc. What has the AI to go on, to produce a credible fight that helps develop the characters in a way I'd find convincing?
It takes both. I've read hundreds of Star Trek novels and hundreds more Star Trek fanfic stories.
So how good a Star Trek writer am I?
Turns out, not very. I can't write a serious Star Trek story to save my life, even though I've read a great many good ones that other people have written. I've tried, and the story either fizzles out or takes the proverbial turn at Albuquerque and becomes something else. It turns out that I can write Star Trek satire, parody, and crossover satire and parody. And yet the amount of this type of fanfic that I've actually read isn't that much.
Franklin W. Dixon is a house name that is/was (dunno if that series is still going) used by whoever was hired to write the books. There was a house style that had to be adhered to, and elements that had to be present in every book. That's how it is in series of this type, whether it's Hardy Boys, Nancy Drew, or any other juvenile mystery or science fiction series (I have most of the Tom Swift Jr. novels, for instance). Sometimes it works well, and sometimes... well, let's just say that sometimes carelessness creeps in. The discontinuities and retcons in the Trixie Belden series is actually pretty hilarious at times, with the kids changing ages in reverse in the same novel, or changing eye colors or even names from book to book.
People writing under a house name are doing it as a job, but I'm not sure how creative they are. One Nancy Drew story is very much like another, and I can't think of very many that really stand out. It's different for the Alfred Hitchcock and The Three Investigators. Some of the mysteries in that series are quite clever and creative and I wonder what sort of story an AI would come up with that I'd appreciate like I appreciate my favorites that were written by a real human.
Exactly. Writers (real ones) put a bit of their own lived experiences into their work, even if it's just a casual thing like basing a character on a RL school friend or coworker, or the meal that the protagonist ate on a meal the author remembers.
AIs don't have lived experiences, and so what they produce tends to be flat. And no, I'm not inclined to help them get less-flat.
Now we are getting into Butlerian Jihad territory, and whether you prefer the BH/KJA crap or the version in the Dune Encyclopedia that predates BH/KJA by 15 years or so and has Frank Herbert's approval, it's still not a future I'd want.
Fanfiction didn't just spring into existence when the internet started. It's been around for a very long time. Science fiction itself as a branch of literature is approaching the century mark, if it hasn't already come, and of course people back then were just as apt as people are now to try their hand at writing, based on something they read and liked.
So if FFN and AO3 get choked out with AI-generated crap, I've still got a huge shelf of fanfiction to read that was thought up, written, printed, and published anywhere from the '60s to '90s, before it was available online, and what's also important to note is that even though a lot of that has been uploaded by now, the original artwork mostly hasn't.
For instance, the Valjiir Continuum link in my sig leads to some very good TOS-based fanfiction that was originally written and published in the '70s-'90s (not promoting my own stuff; I'm just a long-time fan of their work when it was only available via snailmail or in person at conventions). But the website contains NONE of the original artwork, and while the person who does the artwork for the online versions is good, I have to say that I much prefer the print versions.
Okay, here's what I think about it, then.
I came to this subforum to read fanfic created by humans. Not AI. I want stories that come from a human mind, that a human wrote, that are based on human experience.
There are plenty of other places on the internet for the fake stuff. If fake fanfic is posted here, I will not only not read it, but I won't bother promoting this subforum to the fanfic authors I know on other sites.
Frank Herbert considered suing Lucas for plagiarism.
There's a difference between "studying" and "ripping it off and claiming it as your own."
Heh, I wonder what it would make if fed books that use a unique grammatical style or dialogue style because the author chose to do something nonstandard?
It takes some adjustment to read such books. To take a Star Trek example: How Much For Just the Planet?. I couldn't get into that book at first. It was confusing and frustrating, and I considered returning it to the store.
But later (a couple of years later), I finally realized how to read it so it did make sense. That book is a Star Trek operetta in prose form. I used to work in musical theatre, so I just imagined myself sitting in the audience, watching the book happen (and since I worked backstage, it was easier to tell what was going on off-stage).
Could an AI manage that? Could it write such a book and make it fun?
The thing is, an AI doesn't need to worry about rent, food, utilities, or any of the dozens of other things real artists have to worry about.
I still trust my own editing abilities over an AI editor.
Literacy was a thing 5500 years ago. And a million years isn't much on evolutionary scales.
Better hope the machines don't break down and we still remember how to do the work ourselves.
What "new avenues"? If a painter gets pushed out of the market by an AI, should the human painter take up knitting?
Oops, there are knitting machines, so maybe try music?
Oops, too much modern "music" is just noise and people shouting instead of singing and a lot of the voices aren't even real.
So what "new avenues" are you suggesting?
Last edited:
I've been thinking things over, and I'm changing my position on this. Especially in light of recent events on this board. I don't think it should be allowed. This should be a place where our creativity is allowed to thrive. If AI writes something, and you claim it as yours, then it's just as bad as what happened here with another author claiming they had written a story that was another author's. The issue is not about changing technology or inflation, it's about creativity. This should be a place that embraces the human creativity.
Some actual AI consequences:
1. Amazon put up an AI generated audiobook system in hopes of driving audiobook narrators out of business.
2. Amazon was deluged with 11,000 AI written books per day for Kindle Unlimited.
3. A large number of independent book developers immediately banned acceptance of any AI written material as did places like Shutterstock for AI art because it is disgusting.
4. The screenwriting guild demanded that AI be banned from major studios.
The only people benefit from AI are corporations attempting to destroy artists. These are the facts not the wishful thinking of people who believe that AI will somehow benefit anyone but the bottom line. I don't even entertain the people who somehow think it is a kind of natal consciousness because, well, that's silly. It's "the water maintains the memory of the drugs put it in it" flat out wrong and lying to oneself.
I am confident that we can outlaw AI from use in any professional capacity but it will require artists and workers like the Screenwriters Guild to demand it. Hopefully lawsuits will also drive these corrupt corporate goons out of business as well.
AI use is no different from strikebreakers.
Which is Group X?
And what, exactly, are you proposing is the use for AI generated works?
And even if there is a use, are you suggesting authors should willingly surrender their intellectual property to create that device?
And a lot of times it is in fact true. What's your point?
Or are we going to start defending the Sackler family inventing legalized heroin?
An invention is not a gift from God, it is a creation of a tool for a specific purpose. Alfred Nobel noted that even if you make something with the best intentions, you have to be mindful of how it is used as his previous legacy was one of war and death. A man who invents a better form of napalm is not making the world a better place.
The A-Bomb may have had some use but the H-Bomb is just a world ending piece of idiocy and Oppenheimer agreed.
Extreme examples? Yeah, but this, "Progress can't be stopped because it's invariably good" is silly in the age of global warming.
Or sue, sue, sue until they go out of business. Because that's how you defend your IP.
And the people who made it deserve to be bankrupted.
It's a very winnable fight and the Screen Writers Guild have shown it has to be fought and have already won big on it.
Last edited:
So Amazon has its own version of the bot-narrated YouTube videos now?
Just a couple of days ago I listened to a few minutes of a Dune video, and it was painfully obvious that a human wasn't narrating it. Yet the comments section had people raving about what a wonderful "analysis" it was of the movie (with mispronounced words and names, stiff language, obvious errors in some details).
It's getting so the search engines are choking on AI-generated crap.
And all I need to do to get my own comments infested is highlight a sentence. Up pops a "helpful" offer from Copilot to rewrite it.
If I want to revise my comments, I'll do it myself.
Yes, because the goal is to cut artists out of the business.
They only work if they copy someone's voice performance completely and even then with no changes.
Here's a link to Amazon's platform:
https://aws.amazon.com/polly/
Here's an AI example that's the best of how it might work but, of course, the artist isn't compensated.
If it ends up being viable, they will begin to completely cut out groups like the SWGA.
As far as suing them, you’re going to have to prove more than “AI did the same general story I did”, you will have to prove that it did more than copy the broad strokes of a story.
You haven't answered a single one of my questions.
Plus, as as someone who is actually published with the largest publisher in the world, I can tell you with 100% certainty that your argument of "keep it off the internet" is specious at best.
That doesn't EVER apply to IP piracy, and it sure doesn't now.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't imagine why anyone would advocate for AI-created works unless they can't create them on their own.
Similar threads
