Should we allow for AI-generated fiction writing?

[Sgt_G]

I posted a few AI-generated fiction stories in a thread "Letting AI write a story" {https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/letting-ai-write-a-story.316184/} just to show what the AI author is capable of.

After talking with a co-worker, I think the subject of AI-authorship deserves some discussion.

In my co-worker's world (D&D / general fantasy), he said there are many people using AI to generate fiction on various website. Some in his group say it's okay to get the basic story down, and then for a human to edit it, but he told me doesn't feel that AI has any place in writing fiction.

Obviously, it would be in poor taste, if now down right unethical, to post an AI-generated story and claim it as your own work. I would consider that to be a form of plagiarism.

Opinions??

 

[admiralelm11]

I wouldn't. That's just me, myself, and my characters.

 

[Robert Bruce Scott]

Obviously, it would be in poor taste, if now down right unethical, to post an AI-generated story and claim it as your own work. I would consider that to be a form of plagiarism.

At the current state of the art, AI-generated stories are essentially plagiarism. However, the apparent creativity of AI generated stories will inevitably improve and at some point AI will be writing astonishingly good fiction. As a musician, I find the idea quite loathsome, not because I stand to be outdone by a computer, but simply that the competition is being created without any concern for human writers, musicians, sculptors, etc.

But then, people continue to play chess.

As for your initial question "Should we allow of AI-generated fiction writing?"

Try and stop it. And good luck with that.

Thanks!! rbs

 

[Firebird]

AI as a crutch for those who want all the accolades of a finished product with none of the work and labor is sadly something we can’t avoid, unfortunately. Regardless, I have no qualms with saying it shouldn’t be allowed. It’s theft and it’s lazy.

 

[Gibraltar]

Unless there were glaring issues that identified a story as having been AI-generated, how would we even know?

As the systems improve in complexity, this will become a greater and greater issue, but people can post whatever they like and make any claim they want regarding it.

 

[BrotherBenny]

The current AI is trained using other author's works without their permission. Anything it writes is fruit from the poisoned tree

 

[Bynar0110]

I compare AI writing to premade frozen fast food pizza that lacks feeling of accomplishment and the personal voice of the writer writing a story from scratch.

My writing may not be the best, but I rather share my poorly written story than a perfectly written AI story that lacks my own voice and personal experiences.

Just like with the pizza, there is something special and fulfilling about creating something on your own, even if it may not be perfect. So, I choose to embrace my imperfect writing and continue to work on it, rather than rely on the robotic and soulless writing of AI to do the work for me.

 

[Hawku]

AI writing reminds me of that Lower Decks episode where they let the holodeck write its own Boimler adventure in search of meaning.

 

[BillJ]

AI Writing? Yes.

AI as a crutch for those who want all the accolades of a finished product with none of the work and labor is sadly something we can’t avoid, unfortunately.

Or some could simply be people who struggle with writing but want to be creative...

It sounds like Republicans and welfare. If they wanted to work, they wouldn't need welfare.

 

[Sgt_G]

How about we keep the politics down in the political threads, please?

 

[valkyrie013]

Currently AI is just a fancy google search algorithim. regurgitating work it has already sampled.
Its like tracing a DaVinci, Woo i'm good as Davinci! .. ah no.

But it is getting better, and as it learns, itll start being less plagerist. However, once an example of a "Good Writer" is put in it, Everything that it pushes out is going to look like writer X. Like how most of the AI art looks the same.

 

[Robert Bruce Scott]

Currently AI is just a fancy google search algorithim. regurgitating work it has already sampled.

Yeah... but that kind of describes me too. I've read a lot and I mean a LOT of sci-fi, fantasy, philosophy, history, psychology, physics, art history... I've deliberately borrowed stylistic tricks from Douglass Adams, Robert Pirsig, Frank S. Herbert, Stephen King, and J.R.R. Tolkien, just to name the five that I borrow from the most often. I borrow gags from favorite movies and television programs and some of my episodes are clearly inspired by something that occurred in the franchise.

Which gets us into a discussion about what originality means. According to a Jungian analysis, there are only 7 basic plots. You'd think we'd stop writing - after all, they must have been adequately explored by now...

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

It's entertaining to play with, I suppose. Maybe if there was a dedicated "author" thread for whatever AI one used.

As an interesting exercise, try inputting titles of real episodes/episode pitch game stories (after you've come up with a story out of your own mind first) to see how your story differs from the AI's.

 

[Will The Serious]

I'm in favor of allowing AI participation. If, for whatever reason, some AI decides it likes writing scifi, I'd love to read its stuff.

As for someone asking an AI writer to write a story for them; well, that's just what people do when they are fascinated with a new toy, they play with it, they explore it and they exploit it.

Yeah... but that kind of describes me too. I've read a lot and I mean a LOT of sci-fi, fantasy, philosophy, history, psychology, physics, art history... I've deliberately borrowed stylistic tricks from Douglass Adams, Robert Pirsig, Frank S. Herbert, Stephen King, and J.R.R. Tolkien, ...

I took classes for a Masters in Education. One of the hot subjects that came up was, how do we teach good writing? Most of the class suggested having students write more as the path to good writing. I was the one person that said, no, good writing is not achieved by writing more bad writing. Good writing is achieved by studying examples of great writing. Read.

If the goal is to create and enjoy good science fiction stories, then who cares where it came from? If the goal is to be creative and express your ideas in words, write. Forget about the author of other stories. If it's good, learn from it. If the goal is to enforce some sort of sense of fairness and equity among people striving to compete as authors, then ban the cheating. Otherwise, what does it take away from us? Good fiction doesn't rely on its creator's origins. Great art is great regardless of who the artist is.

Fan fiction is technically plagiarism, except that Universal Studios, Lukas Arts, and others have established limited grants to the free use of their materials. These are creative elements that are so well known by the larger public that no one would ever expect an audience to believe the Trek Universe or the Star Wars Universe came from anywhere but Gene Roddenberry or George Lucas, etc. No one can successfully pass such well known creations off as their own.

Our own creativity is in the story itself, in the way we put our words together, in those small details and big ideas that didn't come from some other creator. This is what AI writing does. Maybe some author doesn't write the words, but they are the Edward Stratemeyer of the stories created. (In case you don't know who Edward Stratemeyer was, he was the creator of the Hardy Boys. The series of books were written by ghost writers).

-Will

 

[Robert Bruce Scott]

I'm in favor of allowing AI participation. If, for whatever reason, some AI decides it likes writing scifi, I'd love to read its stuff.

Are we certain this was written by a human? Sounds like a position an AI might advocate for...

Good writing is achieved by studying examples of great writing. Read.

Amen. rbs

 

[Sgt_G]

Maybe if there was a dedicated "author" thread for whatever AI one used.

See the link in my first post above. Is that what you're looking for??

 

[Laura Cynthia Chambers]

I meant, for instance, Google Gemini gets its own "author" thread, Chat GPT, etc. Not its own account, but anyone who uses that particular AI can post what it came up with when they input something.

 

[evilchumlee]

Yes.

AI isn't something to be afraid of. It's a new technology. There is absolutely no reason to not allow it, it's a wonderful tool that opens up avenues of creativity that had not been an option for many, people who had idea for stories but aren't adept at writing, have ideas for pictures/art but are not adept at drawing, etc. It's still art, and it still fuels creativity. That's a good thing.

AI is here, it's not going away. Better to embrace it than go luddite style.

*ESPECIALLY* in fan fiction. There's other arguments for commercial applications, but fan fiction? There is literally no reason not to.

 

[Charles Phipps]

I feel that any AI generated fiction trained on other authors' writing is plagarism and that anyone who attempts to make money off of it should be sued to oblivion. Speaking as an indie author, large companies exist to cheat and steal from us all the time. Same as they treat traditionalist authors.

AI writing is nothing more than a scam and a way to further destroy content creators for the people who care nothing for the art.

 

[evilchumlee]

I feel that any AI generated fiction trained on other authors' writing is plagarism and that anyone who attempts to make money off of it should be sued to oblivion. Speaking as an indie author, large companies exist to cheat and steal from us all the time. Same as they treat traditionalist authors.

Here is my fundamental issue with the AI stuff. I somewhat agree with you here... but I find the issue completely irrelevant to AI.

If someone uses your work to generate money, yes. You have grounds to sue.

WHO or WHAT is doing the copying is irrelevant. An AI using your writing or my human mind just using your writing for my own is exactly the same thing. The AI is merely a tool.

If someone is plagiarizing, they're plagiarizing and there are trademark/copyright laws for that purpose.

Now the thing is, putting a blanket "sue anyone using AI trained on works" I feel is wrong because again, it's doing the same exact thing a human mind does. Are you telling me that your writing is 100% your own thoughts and has not been trained, in any way, from writings you have read. In other words, your brain has not been trained by existing works...

The answer is... no... no it hasn't. Your brain has been trained with existing works from authors, just as an AI "brain" is trained.

The only thing that is relevant is the final product. If my AI-generated story is about a Captain on a starship that flies around exploring worlds and meeting new aliens, does Paramount have grounds to sue me, because it's plagiarizing Star Trek? But the AI spit out the ship is the CSS Explorer, with it's Captain George L. Rooker, representing the Galactic Confederation of Worlds.

Is in inspired by Star Trek? Yup. Is it Star Trek? Nope. I lied... that wasn't AI generated. It was generated by my human mind.

Why would the fact that it was generated by AI be relevant in any way? It's either plagiarism, or it's not. The tool used doesn't matter.