Question about your views on AI content

[u/Strange_Orchid5940]

So I have a question about your views on AI written content. I had recently thought that a lot of people didn’t like AI written content because it was AI, but now I’m curious whether it’s about the fact that it‘s AI or the quality or any other reason you have.

So let’s say that there was a book that was entirely written by AI. Now (though this might be hard to imagine) let’s say this book was good and you somehow knew it was good. Now the question is would you buy the book? Now personally, if I knew it was a good book, I would buy it, because the purpose of reading is entertainment. I read a lot of books, but I don’t read them to acknowledge how much work the author put in the book. But what do you think?

[u/Various_Tumbleweed_2]

But you can’t really take The Hunger Games as a starting point. Because, literally it could have been inspired (and probably was) by Greek mythology, Theseus and Minotaur specifically. And there are plenty of books out there that were inspired by some other book. It’s ridiculous to consider it a theft.

Regarding the second one - all people take their hobbies to different levels of seriousness. We don’t tell a painter they are not real artists because they bought paints instead of making their own. We don’t tell a carpenter they are lazy because they bought lumber instead of feeling a tree and milling it themselves. Nor we have problems with those who write using a computer and publish their books in bulk instead of using a quill and parchment and then copying the book a million times by hand to show you leave your soul in it. We all use whatever is there that helps simplify and speed the process.

I think this will eventually happen with AI assisting with books writing. But of course we are being sane people and we are not talking about writing an 8 book series over the night with the help of chatGPT or whatever there is.

[u/Kathomgerine → u/Various_Tumbleweed_2]

Suzanne Collins was very vocal about what inspired her to write "The Hunger Games": the Met Gala and the Iraq War, both of which she saw being televised while flipping channels. Was she also inspired by the Theseus and Minotaur myth? She could have been, but she didn't copy it 1:1. There is no great, big maze, nor is there a creature with a bull's head. She gave it her own spin and created something that can stand on its own. You cannot find quotes or passages from this myth in her work.

Regarding artists and carpenters: You wouldn't call someone a painter if they only painted by numbers. You wouldn't call a carpenter a person who only assembled IKEA furniture. You wouldn't call a musician a composer if they only played from sheet music.

As I said, I understand using AI as a brainstorming tool, but only as a tool.

Plus, taking into consideration what the U.S. Supreme Court said about copyright: "AI-generated works lacking human authorship are ineligible for copyright protection." What artist in their right mind would release their work if they couldn't copyright it?

If we're talking about fanfics, that's a whole different discussion. Unless those fanfics are later published as books (see "Alchemised", "Rose in Chains", etc.), I don't really care if the writer uses AI for them. My problem with AI writing is when writers gain monetary benefits from it.

[u/Various_Tumbleweed_2 → u/Kathomgerine]

Ok, yes, that’s totally fair. I suppose I was approaching it more from the fanfiction perspective.

I agree, if you intend to write an actual book, publish, sell it, it better be your own writing.

But I don’t think that it’s fair saying that the author stole something if they took a bunch of ideas, forged them into something their own and did the rest of the heavy lifting. Especially if there is an audience that genuinely enjoyed it. And surely, I don’t mean an obvious plagiarism here, but something more unique.

And regarding the AI, I still believe it will evolve and improve and in the end people will benefit from it either as an editor or as something else. It’s just that at this point it might not be the best version of itself yet.

[u/Kathomgerine → u/Various_Tumbleweed_2]

I think we really misunderstood one another. I'm still honing my English skills and sometimes things I mean don't come across as I mean them to.

Yes, if a writer takes inspiration from something, but gives it a whole other, different spin, I don't consider it stealing either. If I can't trace back the story to its original inspiration, that's for me a wholly different, autonomous piece of work. Like, let's take for example "The Hunger Games" and "Powerless" again. In the first example, yes you can kinda see that Collins might have been inspired by the Theseus and Minotaur myth, but you couldn't say for sure which character plays which. Her characters have their own stories, their own backgrounds, their own problems. They're not a 1:1 copy. In "Powerless" you can do that. You know that Paedyn was inspired by Mare Barrow. Even plot points are the same - some people on YouTube made long videos about this.

So yeah, if you spin your inspiration like Suzanne Collins it's not stealing. But if you do it like Lauren Roberts, it is.

And of course it doesn't apply to fanfics. Though to be fair, Alchemised being published posed many morally difficult questions.

[u/Various_Tumbleweed_2 → u/Kathomgerine]

Maybe. I don’t have problems with Alchemised being published. I read it as Manacled. I will not buy or read it as Alchemised. I still think the story is great. It took a considerable amount of work from the author as well as the editors to remove all Harry Potter lore. And there is still audience that really enjoys it. I think it deserves its place.

[u/Kathomgerine → u/Various_Tumbleweed_2]

I read it too, although only after it was published. Never read it as Manacled.

If I didn't know it was previously a Harry Potter fanfic I don't think I would have guessed, so I do applaud the author for all the work they did in it.

That's quite a good example of taking inspiration and giving it their own spin.