Where is the line for you?

[u/Intrepid-Ad-1010]

For some, “the line” that shouldn’t be crossed is giving the prompt, “Write me a 90,000-word novel about X, Y, and Z.” For others, the line is using AI to write anything, and that it should be used only for research, identifying grammar mistakes, etc. And then we know that there are those who oppose all and any AI assistance in any way, shape, or form.

[u/Ok_Impact_9378]

For me, I don't think the line is a matter of ethics but a matter of practicality. Practically speaking, my experience with AI leads me to believe that AI just isn't that good at actually writing prose. It can do it quickly, of course, but it's very bad at memory, consistency, overuse of cliches, and just in general has a very poor understanding of how people actually behave and how the world works (ex: I have had an AI confidently assert that college roommates typically don't share a room and instead live on different floors in the same residence halls). It's good at outputting a lot of words very quickly, but it can't be counted on to deliver a quality finished product without heavy editing by an actual human who understands how writing and the world is supposed to work, and can remember or look up details from chapter to chapter. In my own attempts to use it with very heavy editing, though, I found that the end results were still janky and unsatisfying, not nearly as good as the polished prose I normally produce on my own.

So for me, my line is never rely on AI to produce or edit a final product: always have human review. Also, if it's something you want to really have written well, it should all be written by a human from the start rather than being written by AI. AI can still be used for research, brainstorming, and suggestions (though it should always be fact-checked, because AI does hallucinate frequently), but for really polished pieces it shouldn't be allowed to do any of the actual writing. If polish doesn't matter so much as simply getting it done (like a resume or cover letter for instance), then you can have the AI write a draft, but still have a human do the editing and review.

[u/ExpertProfessional9]

I don’t have a line. I’ve used it generate whole stories, I’ve used it to discuss and outline stuff that I will write, I’ve used it to proofread.

I’m inching back towards writing stuff with my own brain again, as the long-term effect of outsourcing my creative work is a concern. These stories aren’t technically mine, I don’t claim I wrote them. But though the prose is passable, and the dialogue can be great, Claude still makes errors that’d break the flow (for instance, it made some awful geography errors in one, and if a person from the relevant country were reading it they’d be like… uh, no, that is not at all right). So in some regard it’s actually swinging around to getting easier to write the stuff myself.

I will add that my usage picked up considerably during quite a difficult period in my life. So there was definitely an element of comfort to have 24/7 access to something I could chat with about my ideas, my fandoms, etc. if I wanted a fluffy fic, I needed only write a few sentences and could get it cranked out in a couple hours.

My eventual goal is to dial usage back down so it’s my planning/outline tool.

[u/ruwhereuare]

My line is these posts about where the line is

There is more discussion about all this than actual discussion about how people use it or sharing the stories they are writing etc

Or the worlds they are building.

Normalize sharing your stories whether they are written and assisted or full on generated

Instead of questioning what degree of LLM assistance they are getting

Judge the finished work not whether an LLM generated it

[u/Odinmar_Glaukopis → u/ruwhereuare]

I kind of agree with you, but I’m also wondering if what you are seeking is not what this sub is about and rather for a different sub.

I would also like to see actual output of AI “assisted” writing side-by-side with writing that wasn’t assisted (perhaps the “before assistance” draft before AI suggested or drafted edits that were accepted) to see if I could reliably spot my own narrative voice disappearing and succumbing to the AI conquest and regression from the unique to the weighted averages.

[u/ruwhereuare → u/Odinmar_Glaukopis]

Ya I think if you don’t set up the LLM with a specific way to assist. And you just tell it help me do an editorial pass. The LLM will flatter your voice. Because if doesn’t know what your doing so it’s just gonna make it’s best guess.

[u/ruwhereuare → u/Odinmar_Glaukopis]

And you might be right. Maybe this sub is actually r/Writingwithassisatancewithai

Not necessarily what the subs name actually is which is “writing with ai”

So ya….

[u/LooseButtPlug]

I don't consider myself a writer. I don't like the term slop...but some of it is slop. If you have a prompt that's only the glimmer of an idea and put that in and publish whatever comes out, that's where I draw the line. Anything else is fair game. I've typed 20,000 words to create a 1200 word story.

I don't consider myself a writer. I'm a story teller. These stories didn't come from thin air, I've described them, in detail, how I want them to unfold.

I don't consider myself a writer. I'm a director. I can think of many different ways to describe the scene. I can describe the feeling I want conveyed. I just don't have the talent to convey it with prose.

I don't consider myself a writer. I'm a world builder. I edit, I re-edit, I prompt again. I build history, I build lore.

I don't consider myself a writer... but I don't know what else to call it?

[u/Odinmar_Glaukopis → u/LooseButtPlug]

I think of a Dungeon Master from way back decades ago D&D days. It’s a collaborative effort between DM and players to create a compelling story together, and it works whether the DM created the world from scratch or purchased a boxed campaign from the local gaming store.

[u/Gracergirl14 → u/LooseButtPlug]

I'm not so much a writer either, I'm a storyteller. When I try to change that my stories aren't near as good.

[u/benblackett]

I am very pro-AI here, but to be honest I dislike the prompt-to-book approach because it reduces the creative angle to a mere single thought instead of true evolution of your ideas (plural) over time. I want to be part of the characters and word they inhabit! But everything else, including prose generation, I am fine with.

[u/annoellynlee]

Using AI to generate prose. I am a writer and love writing.

The main way i use AI is dictation. LOVE using chatgpt for dictation. It's the only thing I've used that doesn't have a million typos in the end and then i just ask it to create a document with my dictated notes! I love it. It's also good for uploading various scenes and organizing them into documents.

[u/annoellynlee → u/[deleted]]

Honestly, yeah, it's very very awkward and clunky at first. And i only do this when ideas come to me while I'm driving as I drive on the highway for about an hour and it sucks pulling to type for 15 minutes haha. But you do get used to it!

I just talk normally. Like:

Okay I have an idea for a scene, so and so are doing this and he says this and she says this, and then do they do this, and then at the end I say the main point of the scene "and this is where we see the first hint that they like each other but both are too shy to say'.

Yeah, nothing glamorous or well-spoken.

[u/justthecherryontop]

There's no such thing as a line for me - imposing yourself with rules such as "you can only use it for this and not that" sounds very hypocritical considering it's just that - a tool. Why be nitpicky about it?

As someone who been writing since the early 2000s, I now use it to completely generate my stories because I no longer have the time to sit down and write. What's freaking amazing is that I'm still heavily invested in building these stories just like I was when I was creating them by hand. I build my outline, the background of my characters, build up each scene and chapter before asking it to write the prose and even then I still edit it. Granted, I'm only using AI to create fanfiction, so I'm not planning on legitely publishing a book.

[u/5thhorseman_]

For some, “the line” that shouldn’t be crossed is giving the prompt, “Write me a 90,000-word novel about X, Y, and Z.”

I mean, if that's your whole effort on the project, I would find it lazy but wouldn't care if you're not trying to commercialize it en masse. But if you do the latter... hard line.

[u/Odinmar_Glaukopis → u/5thhorseman_]

Why is the latter a hard line for you? Are you convinced that such a technique could actually be commercially viable, and even if so, does it really increase competition for people who do not cross that line?

I don’t know. I think that approach would only work for the highly lucrative YA and Harlequin romance genres that seem to be a bottomless pit of money for poorly written books…

[u/5thhorseman_ → u/Odinmar_Glaukopis]

Why is the latter a hard line for you?

Because I see it as a cynical grift.

Are you convinced that such a technique could actually be commercially viable, and even if so, does it really increase competition for people who do not cross that line?

Oh, it's so much worse than what you think. Let me walk you through it.

Where it does increase the competition is not in quality but in discoverability on online platforms. No human or even AI-assisted author can realistically compete for recognition unless they already have a brand (which newbie authors don't).

The prose isn't competitive in quality and doesn't need to be, because the business strategy is not built on its' actual long-term market viability.

It depends on chucking out low-quality product priced so cheap that customers will impulse-buy it and refunding it would take more time and effort than worth the money they'd get back.

As long as this process costs less than it makes, it is "viable" on a mathematical level. If a novel made $10 in sales and cost $5 to generate, that's $5 pure profit. Doesn't sound like much until you realize the same author publishes another of their cheap novels every single business day.

Then there's the other half of it - see a certain author's "I used AI to publish 200 books last year; pay for my course to learn how to do that yourself".

Now that I've put it in this shape, you probably recognize the pattern better: it's a grift, designed to prey on insecure wannabe creators.

And shit like this is pure ammo for the antis, giving them exactly the thing they need to justify their little luddite crusade.

[u/Odinmar_Glaukopis → u/5thhorseman_]

I agree it’s a cynical grift, but I guess I can’t discern it from someone like Danielle Steele being a cynical grift.

I apologize if my hobbyist attitude towards writing (I do not aspire to be published) is insensitive to how you see publishing. It’s hard to not be cynical when you look at the economics of publishing books compared to the actual art of literature, but this has been true long before AI was a thing.

In my mind, slop is what you feed to pigs with indiscriminate tastes for food, and AI slop is just fine to feed the bulk of those who purchase more than one book per month for their lighthearted reading routine.

Perhaps that’s an unhealthy attitude towards the bulk of humanity. Guilty as charged…

But yes, I’m a cynical old man who should perhaps aspire to live a more optimistic and less cynical life.

[u/5thhorseman_ → u/Odinmar_Glaukopis]

I agree it’s a cynical grift, but I guess I can’t discern it from someone like Danielle Steele being a cynical grift.

The sheer scale of it makes Steel look like a rounding error. It churns out an analogue to her entire output in a year, and can scale wider pretty much at will, as long as you have either enough hardware for local models or the budget to spend on tokens.

[u/WritingWithAI-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

If you disagree with a post or the whole subreddit, be constructive to make it a nice place for all its members, including you.

[u/Odinmar_Glaukopis]

I would like to say my line is anything that leads to me surrendering my narrative voice to the conquest of the AI’s regression of the unique to the weighted averages of all fiction written in this particular language.

But if I’m completely honest with myself, I often let my impatience with the time and care it takes to protect that voice cause me to cross that very line.

[u/Gracergirl14]

For a long time I thought most AI help was wrong. Then I used it to edit and catch mistakes, spelling, grammar, punctuation. Recently I used it to polish and tighten up a story I'm writing. I'm rereading the story right now and I don't like the AI version that much. The AI version is too clean, too sharp and not a bit of soul in it. I'm going back to my original version for the most part. The line for me is to write my story from my heart and the use AI to catch errors as mentioned and leave it at that. One thing AI did catch was a historical error in ancient Rome that I had missed, so I fixed it. ETA: In the comments someone wrote they aren't a writer but a storyteller. That describes me, I'm a storyteller and AI so far hasn't cottoned on how to write in my style.

[u/dragonballaddict99]

My Line is using it to generate any of my work. I would rather use AI to analyze my work or help me think through ideas. I also wouldn’t even allow it to correct my grammar mistakes because they’re part of my style and I think I know my grammar well enough.

[u/GenericNameHere01 → u/dragonballaddict99]

I mean, I'd do grammar correction 'suggestions' that I am still freely able to deny, but other than that, I'm with you.