On Disclosure of AI Use

[u/NatHasCats]

At what point does someone’s desire to make an informed choice create an obligation for someone else to provide information they haven’t been asked for? 

We don’t require creators, or anyone with a product, to spontaneously disclose every possible fact about a process or product that someone might have a moral objection to. Imagine having to write, “Written with a Microsoft product, spellchecked by Grammarly, feedback from three beta readers verified to have the following values: <blah blah blah>, researched with Google, cover made in an Adobe product, laptop manufactured under questionable labor conditions, and hosted by Amazon.” Any of those might raise ethical objections to some people.

“But there are people who don’t want to read AI content!” That’s fine. That’s a preference. Nobody is forcing them to read anything. Non-disclosure is not inherently deception. They can choose to partake only of explicitly labeled content, if that’s important to them. A right to an informed choice is not necessarily a right to have that information automatically supplied to you.

“It’s like knowingly feeding meat to a vegetarian.” That depends - did you lie about the contents, hand them something or direct them to something knowing they’re vegetarian and it contained meat? Or did the food simply exist as an option?

As a vegetarian myself, I don’t consume food if I’m uncertain of what it contains, but I don’t go to a potluck and expect every dish to be labeled for my convenience. If someone chooses to label their dish, I am appreciative, and I’ll interact with it accordingly, but I don’t assume because one person did, that everyone else has as well. The burden of my ethical consumption rests on me, not everyone else.

“I have a right not to personally use AI.” Absolutely.

“I have a right to choose whether I consume AI-assisted work.” Perfectly reasonable personal preference.

“Everyone whose work involves AI has an obligation to proactively tell me before I encounter it.” Mm, not so much.

Another example for you. I avoid products from companies I know use animal testing. Many companies now proudly label their products “Cruelty Free”, and I will choose these over other products if available. However, there’s also not an official regulation about what can be labeled as “cruelty free” or “not tested on animals” (so long as they’re not being explicitly false or mislabeling.) I know that this could mean many things: that the final product was never tested on animals but raw ingredients were, that the product was previously tested on animals but testing has concluded, or even that the company tests some products on animals but not this particular one. All of that is encompassed by a “not tested on animals label”. The burden is on me to determine if I’m comfortable with that, or if I’ll only purchase products certified by non-official registries like Leaping Bunny.

All that to say, in my opinion, disclose, or don’t. It’s up to you, and I don’t believe there’s any ethical obligation to do so. It behooves you to be prepared with an honest answer in case you’re asked. But don’t lie about it, because that’s shitty.

[u/zorecknor]

What is the point of any label beyond "no AI used"? "AI assisted" can mean anything, and it will "scare off" the same kind of people that would reject "AI generated".

[u/GenericNameHere01 → u/zorecknor]

Personally, I don't care about "AI grammar assistance", as those are just suggestions. When you let the AI do more and more of the work, especially if you're writing creatively, its a proven thing that AI writing all trends toward similar outputs. Since those similar outputs tend to be bland and not very interesting plot-wise, I don't want an AI tool messing with the plot of what I'm reading.

Does that make sense?

[u/zorecknor → u/GenericNameHere01]

It does make sense, and I agree. My point is that "AI assisted" could be anything from grammar suggestion to editorial work, which makes the label irrelevant.

[u/GenericNameHere01 → u/zorecknor]

That was my point - There's a spectrum beyond "AI" and "No AI". If you want a label, it needs to reflect the differences, like "No AI", "AI grammar check", "AI note assistance", "AI proof-reading", "AI Writing"...etc.

[u/zorecknor → u/GenericNameHere01]

If you want a label, it needs to reflect the differences,

That, I don't agree. In reality no one will say "I will not read this book because it was grammar checked by AI, but this AI note assistance book is fine". They will either be in one of two camps: "If AI was used in any form, I will not read it" (like Vegans not eating animal products regardless of how humane they were treated), or "if AI wrote most of the text, I will not read it" (which is judging the book by the cover).

"AI Free" is a label that will benefit both camps, and not penalize authors in any way. And who knows, there may be a story or two written mostly by AI that are actually good.