What are members' views on the use of AI in writing?

[Molyfar]

I completely understand why many authors are sceptical of AI. But for me, it is an essential accessibility tool.

As someone who is deaf and autistic, my head is always buzzing with sci-fi stories and ideas bursting to get out. My challenge isn't a lack of imagination—it’s organising that chaotic jumble of thoughts into a structured format others can read.

Storytelling and world-building shouldn't be limited by communication barriers. AI doesn't create my ideas; it acts as a bridge, helping me translate the worlds in my mind so I can share them with all of you.

 

[Hobbit]

Lots of discussion in my Book Clubs at the moment. It is still often possible to see what is AI and what is not. The biggest issue for us, and I think that this is something that you've said, Molyfar, (welcome by the way!) is that AI can replicate but not originate - at least at the moment.

The result is bland generic material that lacks the thoughts/insights/experiences of a human writer. Readers appreciate that someone has imagined, created, refined and put effort into a written piece of work, rather than just pressed a button.

The issue, as I see it, is that some readers are happy with that.

 

[RedMage]

Hi @Molyfar! Welcome to SFFWorld!

I confess, I'm uncertain how to answer. AI is something I reject immediately as a writer. However, your situation is relatively rare. It makes me think of the current "Own Voices" movement in publishing for stories about minorities and written by people from those same minorities--be the minority race, sexuality, disability, etc.

We've had discussions over the years--one very recently!--about authors who publicize their reasons for not finishing their series. Some have not given any reason, and it's been over a decade since the last book in their series, which ended in such a way that it was not the final book. However, others have publicized and openly discussed the reasons they have struggled to publish the next book in the series. Readers seem to be universally understanding and supportive of those authors who talk about their personal difficulties and how those affect their writing. They still want the next book, but they accept the delay. Meanwhile, the same readers also seem unanimous in their frustration with authors who do not discuss their personal struggles.

Whatever we deal with in our own lives, it is our choice who to share those things with. No one can force you to share. But I think the community of readers and authors, and aspiring authors, would be far more open and understanding of your use of AI if you include an explanation for them just like what you've provided us. Of course, that's not a guarantee but just my experience and belief about how others might react.

 

[Jonas Stark]

I think your situation is one of those genuine use cases where AI may be able to help augment, but there is almost assuredly going to have be some sandboxing on your part to make sure it doesn't try to take over more than you want it to.

I work in cybersecurity these days, so using AI is something with which I'm exceedingly familiar, and the pitfalls are there, to be sure. AI can be a great tool, used wisely.

It is awful at drafting (even technical papers), as well as being creative with story development.

I did an experiment where I pasted half of one of my books into the AI to see how it would finish the story. It was horrific. And this was fairly recent. I don't think the latest fad version of AI will be much more help.

Use it, if you must. Completely understandable. Be sure to fully internalize its limits and ensure you are not tempted to use it for purposes that could wind up hurting what you're trying to build.

 

[kmtolan]

While AI is essentially plagiarism, I could understand your need for it. It remains, however, a justifiable kiss of death for most publishers and writers and should be avoided in most circumstances. My opinion, of course, and one heavily prejudiced as I've had two of my novels stolen by AI databases.

 

[Jonas Stark]

While AI is essentially plagiarism, I could understand your need for it. It remains, however, a justifiable kiss of death for most publishers and writers and should be avoided in most circumstances. My opinion, of course, and one heavily prejudiced as I've had two of my novels stolen by AI databases.

I am extremely curious to hear what you mean by this. How could that happen? Do you mean they were used to train an AI model? I have so many questions, especially since I'm sure my own books are likely to be primarily digital releases here in the modern age we live in.

Another reason I'm paranoid is that in my experiment above, I gave an AI model half of one of my books and had it try to draft the rest of the story, just to see what would happen.

Side note, I just realized that the way AI finished the story reminds me a lot of what we're seeing in film/TV storytelling. I wonder how much of all that stuff is, at a minimum, AI-augmented.

The scary version is people getting accustomed to this subpar version of storytelling.

 

[Stanley Steamboy]

If I was paralyzed, and told someone how I wanted a picture to be painted, did I paint that picture?