AI written books

[Dsharma]

Originally Posted by neil_swann80

With current AI, you're likely correct. Future AI... who knows?

Yes, I know, crazy hypothetical incoming... feel free to roll your eyes and ignore...

If there was an AI deemed sentient, that did create genuinely original content, if you were then to discover this AI had written your favourite book do you think that knowledge would affect your opinion of the book?

Regarding your hypothetical scenario, if an AI were to create genuinely original content and write my favorite book, I think it would definitely affect my opinion of the book. On one hand, I might be impressed by the AI's abilities and find it fascinating that a machine could create something that resonates with me emotionally. On the other hand, I might feel that the book lacked the human touch and connection that I value in literature.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by neil_swann80

If there was an AI deemed sentient, that did create genuinely original content, if you were then to discover this AI had written your favourite book do you think that knowledge would affect your opinion of the book?

Probably so, yes, because of the way I've always viewed art. I follow creators rather than franchises.

I read comics. But I don't read mainstream superhero comics. I love Alan Moore's work and like all right-thinking individuals, think Watchmen is a masterpiece. But I don't give a crap about the recent Doomsday Clock stuff.

I enjoy schlocky books and movies, but I endeavor to seek out the work of particular writers and directors. Not everything Spielberg directs is a hit. But at least it is all his work.

I'm kind of all over the place, but there is a point:

Hollywood built on Spielberg and Lucas. But they only took the spectacle. Many modern movies are made to fit demographics, test audiences and franchise possibilities. The are cold, soulless and calculated.

Modern comics followed the example of Alan Moore and Frank Miller. But they only took the grittiness of it and we got the extreme comics of the nineties and all the early Image garbage.

AI will not produce a Stephen Spielberg, George Lucas, Alan Moore or Frank Miller. AI doesn't have a viewpoint shaped by upbringing.

AI could probably run the Marvel Cinematic Universe for a while. Likely the Marvel Comic Universe as well. It could (and likely will) write many James Patterson books.

But I don't see AI spitting out something like American Graffiti, E.T., V for Vendetta or Sin City.

[ElspethB]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Interesting article on detecting AI written items and how to work around them.

Writers Beware: There is one Big Problem with Using Chat GPT for Blogs

The first three paragraphs of the article:

Before using AI, the most I had ever written was three articles in one day. Since I have been able to get up to six done in a single day.

If you are a writer or in any technical field, you too should learn AI too and become an expert in prompt engineering.

An amateur using AI is boring, but expert using AI is a powerhouse that can get a lot more work done.

I read on, thinking the article was going to point out the stilted language and grammatical mistakes as an example of the "Big Problem," but, no, the rest of it was about how to use AI for content-creation without getting caught.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by ElspethB

The first three paragraphs of the article:



I read on, thinking the article was going to point out the stilted language and grammatical mistakes as an example of the "Big Problem," but, no, the rest of it was about how to use AI for content-creation without getting caught.

That is exactly what DNSB said the article was about, so I don't see your differing expectation. There is very little grammatical mistakes coming out of a LLM. That is one thing they are actually good at, unless you ask it to dial down the sophistication. On that note, you can task it to rephrase the output itself. Not sure why the article requires a different AI to do so.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Hmmm... how to use ChatGPT and not get caught.

Originally Posted by ElspethB

I read on, thinking the article was going to point out the stilted language and grammatical mistakes as an example of the "Big Problem," but, no, the rest of it was about how to use AI for content-creation without getting caught.

You did read the last sentence of what I wrote?

[DiapDealer]

I don't have one single favorite book, but if I found out (after the fact) that a book I really enjoyed was AI-written, I don't think I would care. I'm pretty sure I'd be incapable of unringing that particular bell. Like is like. *shrug*

I may feel a bit put out if a large amount of effort went into creating an imaginary author, but then again, I tend to be a fan of works, rather than their authors.

EDIT: Whoops! Must've replied to the last post of the previous page of the thread. Oh well...

[andyh2000]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

...
What AI is going to go against the grain and create something that unexpectedly captures the zeitgeist? What AI is going to whip up Harry Potter, The DaVinci Code, Twilight, Fifty Shades of Gray or any of the other sleeper hits that come in and change the market?

Amusingly, didn't Fifty Shades of Gray start out as Twilight fanfiction i.e. plagiarism in some people's eyes?

Andrew

[ownedbycats]

Originally Posted by andyh2000

Amusingly, didn't Fifty Shades of Gray start out as Twilight fanfiction i.e. plagiarism in some people's eyes?

Andrew

it's not the only one! (warning: tvtropes link)

I've seen fanfics I enjoy pulled down so the author could "file off the serial numbers" for self-publication. disappointing.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by andyh2000

Amusingly, didn't Fifty Shades of Gray start out as Twilight fanfiction i.e. plagiarism in some people's eyes?

At times, seeing the difference between plagiarism and writing in a shared universe is rather difficult.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by andyh2000

Amusingly, didn't Fifty Shades of Gray start out as Twilight fanfiction i.e. plagiarism in some people's eyes?

Andrew

Fan fiction, but not plagiarism.

[neil_swann80]

Interesting watch on a similar subject. (AI generated images)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQfQiXP9yZA

A 60 Minutes perspective also:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=880TBXMuzmk

[John F]

I was reading an article on a possible Writer Guild strike, and one of the negotiation items is AI written material.

[Critteranne]

As announced on Twitter and on their website, Clarkesworld had to change the cover of their most recent issue because people pointed out it was probably created by AI.

Who would use AI on a cover they submit to Clarkesworld knowing the stance they took after they were flooded with AI submissions?!

ETA: That's the replacement of the replacement cover. While they were getting a new cover commissioned, Clarkesworld had a plain black cover with "AI" in a circle with a line through it.

The replacement cover sends a clear message:

[Quoth]

Boffins at the University of California, Berkeley, have delved into the undisclosed depths of OpenAI's ChatGPT and the GPT-4 large language model at its heart, and found they're trained on text from copyrighted books.

The programmers of OpenAi tools (part financed by MS) enabled their programs by scrapping as much of the web as possible, without consideration if fact, fiction, conspiracy theory/fake news or copyright.
Then it's shuffled and reguritated.

This is not the same a human reading lots of stuff and writing a novel.

https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/...ght/?td=rt-9cp

It's a corporate funded fraud.

[neil_swann80]

Originally Posted by Quoth

This is not the same a human reading lots of stuff and writing a novel.

https://www.theregister.com/2023/05/...ght/?td=rt-9cp

It's a corporate funded fraud.

Depends on the writer. I'm sure we've all scanned articles by writers that could easily have been generated by the current level of AI. Some could have even been generated by a very finite solitary monkey with a typewriter.