Time for our monthly meeting of the Insecure Writer's Support Group! Hosted as ever by Alex J. Cavanaugh, the aim of the group is to offer a safe space where writers can share doubts and insecurities without fear of being judged. This month's co-hosts are Natalie Aguirre, Kim Lajevardi, Debs Carey, Gwen Gardner, Rebecca Douglass and Patricia Josephine.
Today's optional IWSG question is a good one! I'm a bit late today, but I couldn't resist weighing in on this one.
The topic of AI writing has been heavily debated across the world. According to various sources, generative AI will assist writers, not replace them. What are your thoughts?
This one's interesting to me because I'm currently exploring AI themes in my WIP - not in terms of assisting in writing, but in the context of VR worlds and immersive experiences. Suffice it to say, things don't go so well when the characters are allowed some degree of independent thought rather than following preprogrammed behaviour patterns. I suppose it reflects my fear that AI could get out of control if we let it - and the most sinister result could be an overload of blandness. We all know there are already plenty of human-produced works out there in every genre that reproduce the same set of tropes that fans of that area have come to expect. AI can only compound this and accelerate the stagnation because it can only imitate, not innovate. I suppose the argument in favour is that this is giving readers what they want, but art isn't a production line. I like to know exactly what I'm getting when I order my favourite pizza. In contrast, when I pick up a new book, I'd like to be surprised - to encounter a different way of looking at the world, to come away slightly changed by the experience. Also, can AI capture the intricacies and idiosyncracies of human relationships in the same way we can? I'd need to be convinced on that.
AI can't move things forward, it can only reproduce and dilute what's already out there. I don't think it'll produce a great work of world literature like Frankenstein or Lord of the Rings. They may not have been the first ever works of horror or fantasy, but they were different to what came before and changed the game in terms of what those genres could be and what they could achieve.
I could go on, but I'd probably get into an even more worried and troubled state. Maybe I'm a Luddite in some ways, but the only word processing software I've ever used is Word and I don't even like the autofinish feature - how many times does it come out with the wrong thing?! Creativity has to stay in the hands of humans if things are to remain vital and progressive.
Over to you - I'd love to hear your thoughts! I'm sure there are also loads of interesting answers at the IWSG sign-up sheet here.
17 comments:
I like to be surprised as well. And all I've ever used is Word. Probably all I ever will use.
It is interesting and I've enjoyed reading everyone's thoughts. I'm in the wait and see camp for now.
I'm with you in I don't think AI will ever be able to create a timeless classic. That's something only a human can do.
Maybe my creative side sees too many imagined dangers, but I am worried. Students already use it to create papers. Maybe it is more of a danger to nonfiction writers.
Dilute what's out there - now that's a unique way to word it. But you're absolutely right.
I giggled when you said, "I don't even like the autofinish feature " Ha! I rarely use it, but because it's faster to finish the typing than find the tab-period keys!
I too wonder if they can invent a creative AI, one that could write Lord of the Rings. If they did, it's probably game ove.r
It seems you've tackled an interesting project, Nick. My best wishes on seeing it through. I guess I'm kind of a Luddite, too since I have only used word procesing when writing.
I think AI is a good assistant, but should never replace a writer.
AI definitely doesn't do the unexpected. I like your take.
Nick, as you see I'm no Luddite. I embrace change and make it work for me. If anything can help with a synopsis or blurb, I'm in.
Good point about AI perhaps accelerating blandness--I am really sick of superhero movies and billionaire romance novels. I want to hear writers' unique voices! I'm not familiar with the auto finish feature of Word
I agree completely!
AI "can only imitate, not innovate" --good way of saying it.
I also like the sound of your new story.
The saying - just because we can, should we? I think 'some' scientists will take take AI as far as it will go. I believe ego plays a big part. But hopefully like Dr. Frankenstein, there'll be enough ethical scientists who stop this AI monster before it gets out of control.
Your best line is: "AI can't move things forward, it can only reproduce and dilute what's already out there." This is so true, Nick. Great post, sir. Thanks for sharing your insight with your followers.
I agree with everything you've said here. The idea of blandness in art (music, literature, paint) fills me with sadness.
I'm like you in that I use a simple word processing program and it works fine for me. The fewer bells and whistles the better.
Post a Comment