A.I. in writing

[Rezcore]

Like the rest of my colleagues here, I have had the occasion to think about the use of Artificial Intelligence.

From my perspective, using ai to develop plot points, generate names and organize my myriad piles of notes, is the most natural thing. Thus I see ai as an assistant I don't have to give a salary to.

However, as voracious reader, I often find myself in the weeds of webnovels (not the site webnovel, because fuck them). Recently there has been a rash of unoriginal ai written novels, rash being particularly apt in phrasing, as reading them was very uncomfortable.

Thus it is my considered opinion that ai generated literature is, and always will be garbage. Instead of cheaping out and letting Skynet do the work, write that pile of steaming excrement you have in your heart, use ai to proofread and grammar check, but for the love of Jove, don't let it write. Will your early shit, be just that? Yes. But keep going, improve, and write the masterpiece, the Pièce de résistance.

 

[Hans.Trondheim]

Even without AI, there's wave after wave of uninspired, unoriginal works. The only difference is the turn-out time; AI tends to be faster than the human-made contraptions trying to pass off as proper novels.

 

[georgelee5786]

My personally? I hate AI. For anything. I will not use names or ideas or anything else they make. I will not even use them to edit my docs. Do I care if other people do? No, not really. I, however, will never use it.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

I try to avoid AI myself but have no objections to other people using it as a TOOL.
The problem comes when they use it as a CRUTCH and rely on it too heavily, IME (or when they rely on it to read their work as an audio novel... some of the results are unintentionally hilarious, some are outright painful).

 

[Astrolust]

No matter how any of us feel, It seems like it's not going anywhere.

 

[ArchlordZero]

I use AI for the jobs I could not do. I needed an artist, and a proofreader for my book, so Iet AI do those things. But I still keep my job as an author.

 

[Indicterra]

I let AI do editing sometimes, like grammar errors and stuff. I also used to find synonyms It's not that bad

For me It becomes a problem entire story is written by AI

 

[Corty]

I only use AI to generate images and to help me juggle ideas and run them through to see if they would work. I mean, would they be able to function, how much would the machines weigh, etc.?

I had AI simulate the battles I was planning to write so I would have an outline to know what would realistically happen if X and Y went against each other. I also used AI to make me calculate how capable my magic mechs would be. How far can they throw a spear, for example?

Just a few days ago, I used AI to help me calculate and model a believable economy for my made-up city so that when I mentioned in passing how much a new set of clothes goes for, I could back it up with sound reasoning.

As @CharlesEBrown said it is a tool. It is only bad if you use it wrong.

 

[Rezcore]

I only use AI to generate images and to help me juggle ideas and run them through to see if they would work. I mean, would they be able to function, how much would the machines weigh, etc.?

I had AI simulate the battles I was planning to write so I would have an outline to know what would realistically happen if X and Y went against each other. I also used AI to make me calculate how capable my magic mechs would be. How far can they throw a spear, for example?

Just a few days ago, I used AI to help me calculate and model a believable economy for my made-up city so that when I mentioned in passing how much a new set of clothes goes for, I could back it up with sound reasoning.

As @CharlesEBrown said it is a tool. It is only bad if you use it wrong.

You are a true gentle....person? And a scholar.

I have a story that I'm writing about an immortal, and ai has helped me fill in historical blindspot. The one I use alway provides sources and has even written emails for me, when I contact historians and other experts. Course I quality check everything

 

[IanWhite2105]

A.I. in writing should only be used for spell and possibly grammar checks. Any plot points, characters, world building, etc… generated by A.I. needs heavy editing and other alterations to the point where writing it yourself would be just as much effort for a similar or even a better product if have a basic understanding of literature, i.e: the legally required education in most 1st and 2nd world countries. The absolute farthest you can go using A.I. in writing is as an idea machine.

When you are in a writers block a good way to get over it is to write a bunch of random ideas where 90% of them are shit but one or two are usable if you really flesh it out. This also has its uses if you need some chapters to post when your story is about to have a big plot development or story arc and you need 4-5 uploads of time to make sure that is set. Basically a mundane filler episode that nobody really wants but will still watch because they have nothing better.

But again, it is mainly for an idea and not for making an actual chapter. Imbeciles will notice that something is weird about the chapter even if they can’t put their finger on it.

 

[foxes]

I had AI simulate the battles I was planning to write so I would have an outline to know what would realistically happen if X and Y went against each other. I also used AI to make me calculate how capable my magic mechs would be. How far can they throw a spear, for example?

As @CharlesEBrown said it is a tool. It is only bad if you use it wrong.

I've noticed a problem with this approach. If you swap the listed facts that the AI should use, the result can change. That is, the winner turns out to be “first on the list” instead of “strong”. This is where you have to test or use this as one of many options.

Same with comparing different texts with the same meaning. It will be a random result if you go in asking which variant is better. Or search for errors will not give a result if you ask where exactly he found errors after general analysis. And they really can be. More often than not, they're typos.

 

[Corty]

I've noticed a problem with this approach. If you swap the listed facts that the AI should use, the result can change. That is, the winner turns out to be “first on the list” instead of “strong”. This is where you have to test or use this as one of many options.

Same with comparing different texts with the same meaning. It will be a random result if you go in asking which variant is better. Or search for errors will not give a result if you ask where exactly he found errors after general analysis. And they really can be. More often than not, they're typos.

Depends on the data input and model used. Also, you can easily combat this with proper prompting and rules set down for the AI to follow, not simply asking it out of the blue.

Just like any tool, there is a method and way to use it. Yeah, you can cut bread with a butter knife, but that ain't the efficient way to do it.

 

[foxes]

Also, you can easily combat this with proper prompting and rules set down for the AI to follow, not simply asking it out of the blue.

You have to work with it a lot to find the right clues and yet become more uncertain about the result. The more original the result or data, the more glitches, regardless of the model. Even if some of them do it better you won't know after a lot of experimentation.

What I need is exactly an outside evaluation instead of his help in writing. And through long surveys and going through the approaches, I just choose what seems best to me. Even if everything says otherwise.

But I've found an interesting way to work with it. Ever since the opportunity to ask him what's drawn in the picture. I ask him to describe the story unfolding in one or more pictures in a literary style. This gives inspiration to write my own version.

 

[TASTYLEADPAINT]

I use AI tools a lot like Grammarly topell check and grammar check my work. As its cheaper than an editor. I have used chat GPT sometime to give names of places/people but besides that's the maximum. I have experimented with getting it to rewrite bits of my work, but it always felt dull and lifeless

 

[Kamelingil]

I once used an A.I. to assist a certain chapter with precision, but the result was ultimately disappointing. It erased so many important plots and placed nonsense that even I don't know how it got there. AI may be free but it could cause your downfall.

 

[LilRora]

I think many people don't realize how much work goes into making good AI-generated or even assisted writing. In the future, as in most likely 10+ years, it may be possible for an AI to create something good by itself without supervision, but as of now, human input is necessary to achieve any level of consistency. It's usually achieved by setting very rigorous constraints and guidelines for the AI.

Once you sink tens, if not hundreds of hours into that, you can output a significant amount of good content with its help. If you don't do that and try to use AI to write just as is, you'll most likely waste more time fixing its mistakes than save thanks to its work. Without diving deeper into AI, it's only good for some inspiration and minor assistance - what you described you use AI for.

 

[MajorKerina]

I don't think AI as it is right now is a terribly good organizer. Sometimes it'll spit out ideas but it's just ideas that feel like a flavor of something you've seen before. Names are sometimes good but it often doesn't understand the task given.

Never be as good? I think around about 2026 to 2028 AI written fiction will actually be indistinguishable from high quality human writing because of the inherent logarithmic development. It might even be sooner. The key problem is it being able to remember and come up with coherent plot ideas that follow through in a story that makes sense.

Right now, in small scenes, AI is really good when given short and to the point directives. That's what I used it for at several points to get over writers block in very tense scenes that I had trouble putting together coherently.

These are the larger examples for me.

"The other customers were no longer missing, or they were missing in a different way. Instead, she saw a collection of forlorn, withered figures seated in the booths and chairs, with only faint wisps of hair or perhaps a fragment of an eye to suggest that they might once have been human. The only thing they had in common with each other was that they all sat with their heads slumped and their arms limp and dangling lifelessly."


"She screamed so loudly that the sound seemed to blot out everything around the entire room. Her wife tried to rise to her feet, but something was holding her in place, refusing her legs the strength to even quiver. "Please noooooooo! Not like this! She didn't do anything! This is not what we agreed to. Don't kill her! Don't kill my wife!" She rose to her feet as well, pounding on the shimmering forcefield, her expression contorted and wild, begging the gods beyond for some sort of intervention. "Anything! Anything you want! I'll do anything you ask! Please stop STOP STOP!" Her sobs swelled with crazed hysteria."

Both composed by an artificial intelligence based on training with my stuff. The AI had a short leash though and maybe about 700 words total account for how much I used it over 1 million words of my own stuff. Mainly when I felt tired and creatively exhausted and just wanted something else to suggest the continuation of the scene.

 

[AshleyRowan]

No. Just no. I always say that soulful creative work requires a soulful creator.

I could however make an exception for using it to write dialogue for an in-universe evil AI doppelganger, but maybe that's just me.