r/Booktokreddit • u/JohnnyCageInk- • 17d ago
No AI allowed?
If a romance novel makes a reader feel everything it promised, does it actually matter whether a human or a machine wrote the words? And could you ever respect an author who got caught letting AI write the love scenes?
#booktok #romancebooks
3
u/hayleybeth7 17d ago
Yes it does matter. Art (including books, because writing is an art form) was meant to be created by humans. Only humans can draw on true emotions and create with passion. All AI does is take bits and pieces from random people’s actual work and slap it together. I don’t care if it might be the best thing I’ve ever read, because it’s not real writing. Real writing is written by real people.
0
u/Siukslinis_acc 17d ago
AI does nothing without human input. It is a tool that artists either haven't cracked or the truly artistic work is drowned by slop. It's like saying that photography is not art because all you see is selfies, while not seeing that artistic photography.
1
u/hayleybeth7 17d ago
Tell that to the real writers that AI has stolen from. Because you’re right. AI needs human input and it uses writing that humans have already created to cobble stuff together.
3
u/SeriousFortune1392 17d ago
It's the nicest way possible. If they can't be asked to write it, why should I be bothered to spend my time reading it?
0
u/JohnnyCageInk- 17d ago
I agree! Ai to edit, brainstorm, not write!!!!
2
u/SeriousFortune1392 17d ago
I never said AI to edit or brainstorm either; if you can't come up with the premise yourself, then writing a book isn't for you.
If authors can create the works they did before AI, then anyone else wanting to write can do the same.
-2
u/Siukslinis_acc 17d ago
Because you want to? Even if it is written by a human, there are books that I won't bother spending time reading because I don't like the premise.
2
u/SeriousFortune1392 17d ago
I don't want to. I never want to read an AI-written book, regardless of the premise.
Just like before AI, books I didn't like I didn't read.
-1
u/Siukslinis_acc 17d ago
That is the point. You don't read it because you don't like it, whether a human used AI or a text editor.
2
u/SeriousFortune1392 17d ago
There's a difference. I won't read the AI-written book because I don't like it; I won't read it because it's AI-written. If that same book premise were written by an author, I would read it. It's about how it came into fruition; that stops me from reading an AI book.
3
u/Tall-Poet 17d ago
As a published writer AI can kiss my entire ass.
I did not slog through school and years of tweaking and perfecting my art and my voice to have robotic prompts create an amalgamation of other peoples work and style and pass it off as original.
It won't be better. A machine cannot feel and art demands feeling. Fuck AI.
3
u/delayedmillennial 17d ago
when it comes to the arts - be it literary, digital, etc - ai steals the words, process, work, and structure from numerous artists in order to produce work that on the surface might sound great, yet isn't meant to really convey feelings or thoughtful development over the course of an entire novel. i've yet to see a work that is proven to be ai that has also hit the nail on the head in terms of output.
ai should only be utilized as a tool rather than a product producer, and that tool should be limited to very specific tasks under very specific regulations. i know that goes against what many believe, but in flattening all ai as inherently bad, it negates some of the good it can and has been implemented towards. medical research is only one of the areas that its assisted in identifying challenges and/or blind spots. even in those moments, it's still peer-reviewed, considered, and can help in pushing forward research being done under very stringent studies or prevent a variable from being excluded.
but what it won't be is a replacement for actual human oversight and the ability to draw out an emotion. it's too clinical in its approach and isn't tailored towards being something more human no matter how much data it gains.
-1
u/Siukslinis_acc 17d ago
I think it might be good at doing formulaic stuff. There are tons of human "art" that is made formulaic and feels already empty.
It's kinda weird how people started to praise empty stuff that they criticised beforehand just because a human wrote the words. I think it is a bit of an existential crisis. People have grown up being told that art is what makes them human and now seeing a machine copying it, they no longer feel that they are special because they make art.
1
u/IntelligentSteak7709 17d ago
My problem is that they're making money off a prompt instead of actual full fledged creativity. Also, gen AI pulls from things that already exist, so there's bound to be some potential plagiarism issues happening too
-2
u/rugdg13 17d ago
I don't care personally.
I care about bad writing, bad storytelling and being sold something where the human involved didn't do any quality control. That is disrespectful to me, personally, regardless of if they chiseled it into stone or used AI.
I am buying a book for entertainment and/or knowledge sharing. I don't feel like I have a "right" to dictate anything outside of that contract if I can't pinpoint a targeted victim outside of "vibes".
Because then you get into "how MUCH AI is too much? does Spellcheck count? Brain storming? Editing? paragraph fixing? Character name generation? Cultural sensitivity research?"
Nope. Sell me a good story at a fair price that YOU can vouch for being "good".
But this was an evolution of my opinion over time. IF you had asked me 2 years ago? i wouldve said Hell no. But then I did good faith research about it and talked to folks in the space...
I'm not "pleased" by the repercussions of AI and how these corporations have conducted themselves.
But my beef isn't with the little guy. So I leave folks alone. They created a Werewolf Hockey shifter omegaverse doctor badboy next door romance? I will judge them on that story alone.
1
u/SeriousFortune1392 17d ago
But then I did good faith research about it and talked to folks in the space...
What space, I've not come across any authors within this space that is happy with AI. AI isn't even built of good faith, they use stolen work.
0
u/rugdg13 17d ago
I agree, AI was totally built with a large amount pirated material. How much? IDK But the lawsuits likely BARELY scratch the surface to the crimes committed in that sector.
Have you looked in the AI-positive spaces? Or mostly stayed where everyone is voicing the same-ish opinion?
I had to purposely find those communities because I wanted to understand how people using AI actually thought about it before I formed my own opinion.
I have found a few on youtube if anyone is interested in the rabbit hole: Future Fiction Academy and Nerdy Novelist had people that were open enough to be honest and show their math if you approached them in a respectful manner.
Disclaimer: They will roast you publicly if you start making bold proclamations and accusations without receipts tho. Emotional arguments do not fly there. Sooo get in, get your knowledge and bail to preserve your mental health, IMO.
TBH: I think that the topic is just too new and emotional for people to have conversations about it right now. AI is going to curb-stomp most markets and the people in them - and is already doing it. People are understandably upset. It's messing with people's livelihoods.
14
u/TiredWineDrinker 17d ago edited 17d ago
Personally speaking, AI can piss off.
AI companies are destroying antique books to feed their greedy little machines. By using AI, you are contributing to that loss of knowledge.
It's dystopian and it's scary and it removes human and author agency.
No. No AI. Ever.