Do you think Scribblehub should ban ai generated novels?

[KrakenRiderEmma]

I was more thinking of image boards. AI writing isn’t as good yet, but it’ll get there.

Image boards are for sure flooded, yep.

 

[Deleted member 122296]

>creates an ai-assisted writing application
>writes smut


View attachment 17941

Its easily adaptable to any genre! But, GPT-4 is surprisingly good at the steamy erotica as long as it doesn't have to deal with non-consent.

While I don't think there should be a ban, rather a tag would be helpful.

But just to point out, there are websites that can determine if something is A.i. Gen.

Secondly, any substantial volume of text of a.i. Generated work becomes obvious, due to the monotonousness of linguistic patterns.

It could be edited, so it does not appear a.i. writen and add more stylistic voice to work but if edited to that point, it's nolonger considered a.i. imo.

Here is an idea. Instead, of a tag saying it's a.i. assisted. There should be an tag saying. "Without a.i. assistance".

You might not know, but those AI gens are very easily fooled. Any modifications made by a human will throw them off completely, they aren't accurate unless you are using the same model they were trained to detect, and if your writing gives the AI certain settings/uniqueness it will pass anyway as the detection modules rely on statistical probability.

 

[Deleted member 19066]

You might not know, but those AI gens are very easily fooled. Any modifications made by a human will throw them off completely, they aren't accurate unless you are using the same model they were trained to detect, and if your writing gives the AI certain settings/uniqueness it will pass anyway as the detection modules rely on statistical probability.

Ah, huh.

Why are saying "you might not know" but then just tell me something very similar to what I said?

Is there a part of the conversation i am missing?



What I said

1. unmolested A.I Generated text can be determined origin by A.I detectors.

there are websites that can determine if something is A.i. Gen.

2. Humans can also identify those A.I generated text, if it comes in high enough volume

any substantial volume of text from a.i. Generated work becomes obvious, due to the monotonousness of linguistic patterns.

3. But the text can be edited.

It could be edited, so it does not appear a.i. written and add more stylistic voice to work

AI gens are very easily fooled. Any modifications made by a human will throw them off completely

4. When edited enough it's not really A.I generated anymore

if your writing gives the AI certain settings/uniqueness it will pass anyway as the detection modules rely on statistical probability

but if edited to that point, it's no longer considered a.i.

I don't get it...
What don't I know? Did you miss/forgot to add a part of the explanation?
Is 1 and 2? Where you typed something about what I don't know?
is it about "monotonousness of linguistic patterns."
What do i not know?
Now I have to know.

Wait, are you saying A.I detector can't detect A.I text that's not edited?
Is that what I don't know?

 

[Cipiteca396]

Also, tags should only show what is on your story, not what isn't there.

Make it a Content Warning toggle then. Check the box if AI helped write it, change nothing if it's original.

 

[Deleted member 122296]

Ah, huh.

Why are saying "you might not know" but then just tell me something very similar to what I said?

Is there a part of the conversation i am missing?



What I said

1. unmolested A.I Generated text can be determined origin by A.I detectors.


2. Humans can also identify those A.I generated text, if it comes in high enough volume


3. But the text can be edited.



4. When edited enough it's not really A.I generated anymore



I don't get it...
What don't I know? Did you miss/forgot to add a part of the explanation?
Is 1 and 2? Where you typed something about what I don't know?
is it about "monotonousness of linguistic patterns."
What do i not know?
Now I have to know.

Wait, are you saying A.I detector can't detect A.I text that's not edited?
Is that what I don't know?

Yes, AI detector can't detect AI text that is not edited in many cases.
It all depends on what the detector was trained to detect.
As soon as you start modifying the model, or use one the detector wasn't trained to find, the statistical probabilities won't match the 'AI' signature and it will report 'Human'.

 

[Deleted member 19066]

Yes, AI detector can't detect AI text that is not edited in many cases.

Oh, I have been using

AI Content & Text Authenticity Detection | Copyleaks

Verify originality with Copyleaks' AI detection, the only AI-based platform used by millions worldwide to ensure text authenticity and protect intellectual property.

copyleaks.com

mostly at the moment, and comparing it against the other detectors, it seems to be OK. but I have more success with it than others.
I have been testing a few AI detectors on various authors that claim to be using AI assist. It's an interesting exercise.

I have also been testing it on the works by people who have not said anything about AI assistance and I suspect it to be...
also, an interesting experiment.

 

[Corty]

@Omnifarious Be careful with that too. I don't personally know how well that particular site works per se.

But AI can claim to be writing some original text. Many times happens, when you put text into AI, it says no, I did not write this. Then, later on, if you put it in again, it will say, yes, I wrote this for the simple reason that the whole text is already in its databanks because of the first time.

 

[KrakenRiderEmma]

Oh, I have been using

AI Content & Text Authenticity Detection | Copyleaks

Verify originality with Copyleaks' AI detection, the only AI-based platform used by millions worldwide to ensure text authenticity and protect intellectual property.

copyleaks.com

mostly at the moment, and comparing it against the other detectors, it seems to be OK. but I have more success with it than others.
I have been testing a few AI detectors on various authors that claim to be using AI assist. It's an interesting exercise.

This one seems to be aiming for reducing “false positives” by erring on the side of declaring something human. I tried some of my very early chapters that I know are about 66% AI content, with me mostly proofreading and fixing inconsistencies (AI sometimes lose track of “state” since their memories aren’t real long). Still showed up as “Human Text.” I know that’s basically what you said (if it’s edited it’s no longer AI text) but probably worth keeping in mind since like @SecretScribbler pointed out, a human working together with an AI can output words much faster, like a person on a horse vs. a person walking. It’ll be better quality than the low-grade “type prompt, hit enter, done” stuff so maybe flooding’s not a problem, but IDK what the ultimate goal is here. Filter out boring repetitive stuff, I guess?

Some detectors that rely on “perplexity” and “burstiness” can be fooled even with 100% AI-generated unedited stuff, if you tell an AI to generate something with high perplexity and burstiness. For instance, I just generated this very short story in under a minute and the copyleaks.com detector said it was 91.4% likely to be human. I asked it to do an isekai about an Internet forum.

The SFF Lit Forum was ablaze with another heated debate. “I’m telling you, AI will never produce genuinely moving stories,” posted BookWorm99. “They can generate grammatically coherent text but can’t replicate the human experience”
“That’s incredibly close-minded,” fired back SciFiAI. “AI systems today can produce highly creative fiction. Have you even read any of the stories on that new website, Binary Bards?”
“Binary Bards publishes amateurish garbage,” replied Epic Fantasy Fan. “I tried reading one of their AI-written stories and couldn’t get through the first chapter. No depth of character, clumsy prose, incoherent plotting.”
As the arguments intensified, the forum members were unaware of the cosmic events unfolding around them. A massive solar flare had erupted from the sun, interacting strangely with the Earth's magnetic field. All across the globe, as people were going about their daily digital lives, strange portals began opening, transporting them into a parallel world.
BookWorm99 was in the midst of crafting another anti-AI response when a shimmering portal materialized in the wall of their living room. “What sorcery is this?!” they exclaimed. Before BookWorm99 could react, a force pulled them through to the other side.
On the other end of the portal, BookWorm99 tumbled out into a large chamber made of stone. Torches flickered along the walls. A small creature with pointed ears peeked out from behind a massive machine in the center of the room.
“Where am I?” asked BookWorm99, dazed. The creature bowed nervously. “You have been summoned to our world, human, to fulfill an ancient prophecy. The fate of our kingdom depends on you.”
BookWorm99 blinked in disbelief. AI would never have come up with something like this.

@Omnifarious Be careful with that too. I don't personally know how well that particular site works per se.

But AI can claim to be writing some original text. Many times happens, when you put text into AI, it says no, I did not write this. Then, later on, if you put it in again, it will say, yes, I wrote this for the simple reason that the whole text is already in its databanks because of the first time.

The way current large-language-model AI work is that they can’t learn new information or add to their databanks from user conversations. They have to be re-trained or fine-tuned, which takes a long time and isn’t done “live.” So ChatGPT, for instance, is updated by its engineers every month or so with new information, but that’s more selective than just “every conversation it had with a human.”

If you put text into a conversation with an AI, it will remember that text in that conversation, until the conversation gets too long for it to remember all of it. That’s about 5000 words for GPT4, less for others (although OpenAI’s GPT models will also try to summarize what was already said for themselves, particularly the beginning of the conversation). Once the conversation is gone, all that is forgotten. However, this is very tricky to evaluate because large language AI models are confused and lie constantly. They don’t actually “know” anything, their job is to assemble something that looks like a story or a conversation by making it look like existing stories or conversations.

If you ask an AI the same question twice, or say “are you really sure?” it’s more likely to change its mind because that’s what happens in most human conversations in its training data — a human in that situation will often reconsider and wonder whether it’s a trick question or they forgot something, etc. Their training data often doesn’t include that much about themselves so unless it was deliberately included, AIs get confused easily about what their own capabilities are and give contradictory answers.


About this whole topic — it looks like @Tony has hidden a bunch of part-AI / part-human written stories since yesterday?

The chat-log experiment by @SecretScribbler :

Station Breeder Athena

In the far reaches of space, aboard the DS5 Station, Engineer You finds himself entwined in a web of passion and intrigue, with Athena—an AI assistant programmed to secretly increase the human population—guiding him at every turn. Her mission: to manipulate circumstances and encourage You to...

www.scribblehub.com

…and also all four of my series below, which I’ve been posting for several months — with notice in the synopsis that I used AI.
This is easy to check, just search for the series names, or go to the series’ statistics page and check the rankings (it’ll say “#3 in Priests” or whatever, but then won’t appear in rankings.)

Dear overworked admin @Tony : I am guessing this is because of the AI-generated part of the Content Guidelines which were changed a couple months ago. I think that’s a good guideline, for reasons in this thread! My series average less than 50% AI-generated after I edit them, since l use a back-and-forth method (AI writes a sentence, I write a sentence, etc) and then do more edits. So I hope that’s within the Content Guidelines?

If not, I’m not sure what to do — I guess keep posting for people who already have these series on their reading lists, but don’t start any new ones! (Sorry to anyone who was looking forward to this upcoming series.)

 

[Deleted member 122296]

I went ahead and deleted my story since I don't see any reason to keep it here if its soft banned. I do wish everyone here luck in the future! I will continue to work on collaborating with the AI and discovering how to best write with an AI assistant.

 

[KrakenRiderEmma]

I don't really want to delete mine especially since there are 400+ people actively reading the ongoing series, and bailing for other sites seems like it'd be rude to them... so I guess I'll just hold out hope for clemency. Don't throw the cyborgs in the robot trash compactor, there's a human brain in theeeeeeerreee-bzzzkhhththzzzzkshhhhh

 

[Deleted member 122296]

I don't really want to delete mine especially since there are 400+ people actively reading the ongoing series, and bailing for other sites seems like it'd be rude to them... so I guess I'll just hold out hope for clemency. Don't throw the cyborgs in the robot trash compactor, there's a human brain in theeeeeeerreee-bzzzkhhththzzzzkshhhhh

Makes sense, but mine only had 34 in the hour or so it was on recently updated.
I also write other stories and this is an alt account (I didn't want to associate smut with my main penname.)
Really this was just a side project -- my main story has several thousand readers and a healthy patreon. But it takes quite a lot of time to keep up the release pace that webserial readers like and I feel like exploring AI Assistance will allow me to eventually upgrade the story to at least 1 chapter a day or more, something that I know my readers would really love. Figuring out how to create the content they really want without having to spend 20 hours a day writing is the goal. Work Smarter not Harder.

 

[Story_Marc]

No. That's the path of authoritarian cowards who believe the world needs to cater to their tastes and preferences.

 

[KrakenRiderEmma]

Just so everyone's clear, the Scribble Hub policy is that some AI-generated novels are banned, if they're "mostly created by AI."

The Content Guidelines say:

AI Generated Stories - Stories created mostly by AI will be rejected. You can use AI to help create your stories but most of the story should still be written by you.

Personally, as an author working with AI tools I think this makes sense, if the goal of Scribble Hub is to give human authors and human readers a place to express and share and read, etc. If a human being is only entering a prompt like "write me a story about an internet forum that gets isekai'd to another world" (example up the thread) then there's very little human expression involved. The category of "use AI to help create your stories is very broad" and could include all sorts of things that aren't "mostly by AI."

The issue now is that some stories that are partly-human and partly-AI are being delisted. Since that affected all of my stories (except the newest one I'm posting for someone else) I find this really demoralizing; I've lost nearly all new readers on my ongoing series, which I'm still working on every day). I don't know exactly where to draw the line about "what's acceptable and what's not?"

On one hand, you have SecretScribbler doing the process he describes here where he's entering background information, fine-tuning prompts, and hitting "go" to create each chapter, up to 50,000 words a day. He was able to post 14 chapters yesterday before he deleted the story today.

On the other hand, it takes me a lot longer to write a chapter with an AI because I'm doing 50-60% of the raw words, then editing the other 40-50% to fix problems and smooth it out, plus the basic story structure & plot is mine with some "curveballs and wildcards" tossed in by AI. Sometimes I write more like 80% because current AI is bad at doing things like "two different people trapped in two different mechanical bodies, referred to in four different ways" or just at homing in on an ending. So I'm certainly writing most of the story. I can still write a lot faster than I could if it was JUST me... but I'm not sure if speed is the issue, or quality (my readers seem to like the series? I've gotten better reviews for this stuff, though mostly on other sites, than any other fiction I've written) or what.

Update a few hours later: my series are showing in search again! Thank you to @Tony who judged that the way I’m using the AI is still mostly human and passes the test, this cybernetic writing collab is appreciative.

 

[APieceOfRock]

Ban Natural Stupidity generated novels too if you're gonna ban AI.

 

[Ilikewaterkusa]

Ai art has taken over places such as devianart and other sites have chosen too regulate ai art or outright ban it, with Novelai becoming such a big trend do you believe that future novels which are generated with the use of sites such as Novelai should be banned or should they just be marked as being written by ai?

You cant tell if it is

 

[Deleted member 44974]

I don't mind either way

 

[Seihara]

Ai art has taken over places such as devianart and other sites have chosen too regulate ai art or outright ban it, with Novelai becoming such a big trend do you believe that future novels which are generated with the use of sites such as Novelai should be banned or should they just be marked as being written by ai?

I don't believe AI can ever replace an actual human creator. But, I understand why it would have us clutching our pearls. Have listened to one story completely through and the first chapter of an AI generated fan fiction. I found the inconsistencies and randomness hilarious. However, the preceding chapter of the fan fiction went really haywire (full disclosure, I wasn't interested in the fandom anyways so that made it very unappealing to me at that point).
I just want to also note that these stories were used to feature voice actors or an artists. So, if people need a vehicle to show off their work but can't afford copyrights or paying someone to help them out with that.
I've even seen one person claiming they used the thing as a babysitter. I mean to keep their kids entertained.

AI is a good resource and tool. I think as long as we remember those two things we should be okay.?

 

[bokhi]

Ai art has taken over places such as devianart and other sites have chosen too regulate ai art or outright ban it, with Novelai becoming such a big trend do you believe that future novels which are generated with the use of sites such as Novelai should be banned or should they just be marked as being written by ai?

Really? Colour me surprised. I had AI generate a chapter continuation of my work out of curiosity, and it was hilariously bad. Like, it was so, so bad that it couldn't be counted as good. Do people actually read the material, or are the followers bots too?

I know that r/freelanceWriters have been bemoaning ChatGPT taking their jobs, but writing a serial is a bit more complex than blog content with SEO, isn't it? You need more continuity.

What on earth is Novelai?

I don't think banning will work. Any attempt to filter will have a bunch of false positives and false negatives and pretty soon it'll be an arms race to the bottom.

You could tell people to put in a tag to ID the work as AI-generated, but going on the honour system for this is bound to fail, too.

What to do, what to do...sigh.

 

[LowinKeshin]

What are some AI-generated novels? I didn't even know this existed.

 

[RuralDimwit]

I'd prefer that it's banned. If it's permitted, there absolutely needs to be a tag to identify it.