%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
 A message forum for general discussion. Please come and chat with others! |
| Will artificial intelligence eventually lead to the end of traditional authors? |
| Will writing lead to the end of story-telling, and the traditional oral stories? Will mass-produced books lead to the end of literature? Will the pulp books lead to the end of higher end publishers? Will movies lead to the end of reading? Will TV lead to the end of reading? Will computers lead to the end of books? No. Because books have something that AI cannot fake - emotion and uniqueness and human expression. While AI may get better (although with the amount of lawsuits pending, it could be a while), the fact that AI does a lousy job - heck, we've had AI grammar help for years and it still gets it wrong a lot! - gives me hope for traditional authors. But I do think that we, as writers, need to be aware of the threat AI could pose, and we need to make sure we write as much as we can as well as we can to ensure AI is not seen as a viable alternative... Having said all that, I am fearful that AI, being the thieving system it is, could make people in the industtry very wary. |
| I don't think so. AI can't add feelings or emotions. It may write mechanically. A structure only. You have to do more hard work to give it a shape than your normal writing. So I avoid it. |
| I don't think so. A lot of things dubbed AI are in fact what people in the know call Machine Learning (ML), which is different - AI includes ML as a subset, so if something is actually ML it isn't AI. Subtle but important. Both AI and ML can be 'not smart', yet eventually learn to write stories as well as your favourite author. It just takes time and a lot of (input) samples and someone telling them whether each sample is a hit or miss - that's how the software 'learns'. At first it will likely learn sentence, paragraph then story structures, and eventually learn how to tweak a reader's emotions properly. Will that then be the end of human authors? I think there will always be a place for them, and besides, software is still a long way off from being able to write a novel - check out the "AI written" novels on Amazon, there are some humans on there claiming they wrote the novels but reading them reveals the disjointed attempts by software. |
Just no. ** Images For Use By Upgraded+ Only ** |
| For the more commercial end of the business - popular magazines and the like - I guess it has a real foothold already, but hardly for the quality writing demanded by more discriminating readers. |
| The thing with A I is that it can improve itself and it surely will in time. |
| I think that, right now, everything with any kind of informational lookup is being dubbed AI. In the 1960s, everything was "space age." In the 1970s, everything was "modern." In the 1980s, everything was "new and improved." In the 1990s, everything was "digital." In the 2000s, everything was "dot com." In the 2010s, everything was "diverse." So, is "AI" going to be the hallmark of the 2020s? It's looking like it right now. I use ChatGPT for research for a historical novel I'm writing. Right now, I usually get a current answer couched in historical dates, but the more I refine my queries, the better the answer becomes. I love that I can get reasonable answers for my work of fiction. I want it realistic and believable, not peer-reviewed. As to grammar, spelling, and diction, AI is useful for pointing out things it thinks might be wrong. Of course, I have to make the final decision. I find myself overruling the AI engine more often than agreeing with it. I see it as a copyeditor saying, "Are you sure you want to word this like that?" Dialog is fairly non-standard, by definition, so grammar checkers constantly point out problems where nothing is wrong. Very few people speak as if they have parsed every sentence for clarity. Might AI become useful for pointing out plot holes? Consistent voice or tense? Of course, you would also need an AI engine that allows 100K words in and out to check a novel, much less write one. This last is not an insurmountable obstacle, but it exists as of today, to my knowledge. I view AI a lot like I view fire: It's a great tool, but a horrible master. It's a tool that I'm already using, but in no way is it "writing" anything that I'm doing. |
| No, and here's why: Scene: I'm outside on my front porch on a warm and sunny but windy day. Reading. The AI "virtual assistant" on my phone comes to life. "Hi, I'm Gabby Potanooey, your AI assistant! I see you are reading a book, did you know that I can access thirty-squirty bazillion books online and also write them? You should--" (the wind knocks a tree across the power line) I go on reading. 
"WdC SuperPower Reviewers Group"  | ||||
| No. I don't think so. Think about this scenario. If AI was developed 100 years ago or perhaps its knowledge base cut off 100 years ago, what would it produce? AI is based on its knowledge base which is all in the past. It becomes an echo chamber. It is trained off of what has been recorded in the past. While it is very powerful and useful, if we creators (of any medium) only used AI we would just recycle previous ideas/thoughts/methods. What is the future of innovation/creativity then? It might get there though. I won't totally rule it out. |
| We saw what automation did to assembly lines. In the professional sector where making money is the goal...? A publisher can sell a book without paying an author? Shit. Voice actors are already starting to wage the battle of companies wanting to use their voices. Drones are taking delivery jobs. I'm not preaching the appocalypse here, but there's always a chance that's the paradigm we see. Businesses are always about streamlining, simplifying, and cutting cost. And humans will pick the lazy, easy way, damn near at any cost, out of convenience. Nannies, Maids, and landscapers wouldn't exist otherwise. If you owned a publishing company and on top of employees that run printing and distribution, there's editors, office staff, and many authors to manage. If you could just keep neccessary staff, and have the editors plug shit into ChatGTP, maybe have a system learn from the top earners books. That could save thousands. Given the state of bookstores, possibly only do online sells, and stop printing outside of print on demand, about half of distribution could be cut. Here's a human with less work to deal with, and making more money. Is AI a means to an end? All I can say is history can provide some answers or something. With all we do in the name of progress. The Rhapsodic Laviathan; his life as a... |
| I do not believe it will because : 1.) When I was an I.S.T. major in college ... a few years back, we wrote web pages ' old school ' in notepad. However, today there is a trend, as I'll call it, to use A.I. to do the web pages. Granted it's cheaper than hiring someone - but there is a limit to what it can do. So, if you're someone in college, or just starting a Blog then that will probably work for you. However, if you're a business that has a market across several states or countries, then that would be a different matter all together. I think, it will be good at some task, but then there will be a more defined set of task / duties left for the real web designer - and their fee will exemplify that fact. 2.) In music, the release into the market of ' Drum Machines' has made it so simple for anyone to create a drum beat and their own song. Yet, the yearning for real music by real musicians is still there. Therefore, I believe it will make it easy for someone who wants to just turn a buck in the writing market - maybe amazon, but not for real true literature readers; they want more than a computer generated story that's not much different than someone else's story of a similar theme. I think, there will always be an easy, quick way to make some cash if that is your only goal. Most writers, I believe, are in it for more than just a quick buck. But then the ones allowing you to use their A.I. bots are probably the ones making the real money because once again they're selling you a dream. Thats my opinion anyhow. |
| I suppose when a. artificial Intelligence passes a Turing test, our time as writers will come to an end |
| Both machine learning software (ML - often mistaken for AI) and plain old dumb software have already achieved a level where they can pass the Turing Test - although the dumb software can be caught out with a bit of persistence. A lot of the software systems claimed to be AI are in fact just dumb ML systems, because either the people who are 'selling it' don't know the difference, or because they think the public wouldn't understand the difference. The various voice assistants such as Alexa are not AI, they are ML, although they are also able to query AI machines to provide more in-depth responses. |
| interesting article on AI https://www.nyas.org/ideas-insights/blog/have-we-passed-the-turing-test-and-shou... |
| Major point of reflection for me, and I'd imagine all of us humans. https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/taxi-driver-screenwriter-calls-ai-smarter-... Paul Schrader has basically praised A.I. as being more useful in its feedback than any that an executive ever gave. I think the answer is that YOU/WE will ALWAYS have a unique story to tell. It's ours. A.I. better, worse, don't matter. Your story is YOURS. Nothing can steal from your imagination. Until the brain chips do that...har har? |
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
