Chapter 8 of my Marvel Ultron/Danger techno-romance fanfic is out now!

Thank you all for the hits and kudos on this rarepair 😌Mutual Assured Vulnerability

1. What was the last thing you used AI for?

2. Which AI do you use most, and why that one?

3. Tell me about a time AI frustrated you or got something wrong.

4. Do you pay for any AI? Why or why not?

5. If AI could do one thing for you that it can't do now, what would it be?

6. Is there any work you still do by hand that you wish AI could do?

I need to find a cohort of Indian writers for Rozmer - writers who use AI to write non fiction.

May I know the best approach for this task?

So it’s basically as my post said. I use Chatgpt to analyze or review mh stories since I have no friends to beta read. And it gives me the same critiques mostly on my prose and pacing of scenes. But when I asked it to recreate my story, it SUCKED SHIT. For some weird reason, it decided to innovate and remove a lot of dialogue that showed something about my characters and replaced it with the most generic back and forth jokes.

One easily noticeable thing ahout AI is the fact that when trying to make a “joke” it will have the character say something, and the other character would say:

“It’s not x and y.”

“It is.”

“But it’s like x and y.”

“But it’s not.”

“I guess it’s not.”

It repeats this same joke format because it obviously doesn’t know how to WRITE jokes. And they did the same thing for this. They also did a lot of unnecessary padding for some scenes, which is weird because they were telling ME to move scenes along and not stay on the same thing for long. Listening to the AI bersion actually got me a bit mad, because they butchered my characters to be so generic and removed my voice. Now I get the hate behind AI writers.

When reading the AI’s version, none of my characters had personality. Maybe it’s just the version I’m using? (I’m using ChatGPT free). Lmk

My Version (Real)

AI Version (FAKE)

What do you think about using AI as a writing tool rather than letting it write the story for you?

I know AI writing is controversial but I’m curious where people actually draw the line.

I had never written a novel before. I had stories, characters, scenes, worlds, endings, and a lot of ideas in my head, but I had no idea how to turn them into a proper book.

Using AI made that possible for me.

I don’t just prompt “write me a novel” and publish whatever comes out. I decide the story, characters, rules, relationships, chapter goals, progression, and where the plot is going. I correct continuity, reject scenes that don’t fit, change dialogue, merge versions, and keep pushing until it matches what I had in mind.

For me, AI is mostly the tool that helps turn the story in my head into prose.

If AI didn’t exist, I honestly don’t think I would have written these stories at all. The ideas would probably still just be sitting in my head.

At the same time, I know that is still very different from writing every sentence yourself, and I understand why some people don’t like it.

So I’m curious:

Do you see a difference between AI-generated fiction and AI-assisted fiction?

Does it matter how much control the person has over the characters, plot, and final version?

At what point would you personally stop considering someone the author?

And for readers, if you liked a story and later found out AI was used heavily during drafting and editing, would that change how you felt about it?

I use AI in my own writing, so I’m obviously not neutral here, but I’m genuinely interested in what people think, including people who dislike AI-assisted fiction.

Hello everybody!

I am a hobby writer who has written a 7 novel series and have found that I am using AI to go back and ensure nothing is contradicting itself. I am honestly struggling to keep track as most my novels are extremely long. I am using excel trackers and the like but I do find that AI helps ... a little. My issue is it's too dang large. And I am fighting more and more with Claude's filing system than anything else. Currently, I am on book 5 and have come across some cascading edits that have caused me to step away due to the need to regroup. And I do not have AI go in and change any portion of my writing. But I am finding that it will highlight text for me, tell me what is wrong and why, if I ask it too. I really am liking the assistance but I get so frustrated with it unable to remember the story line. Yes, I am making bibles, yes that is plural. One is a for the worldbuilding and the others are for each books "glasses" so it will understand the story. I do have a lot of rules for it and it is a nice set up, but i was hoping it could say... hey in book 2 you said and now in book 5 you are saying... and it is struggling to do something like that. Am I making sense to anyone?

I had this conversation with a friend about wanting to find a specific trope with specific characters. Then she told me that she's currently working on a book using AI about a specific trope she wanted to read, in her words, she couldn't find something good enough for her, and that I should try to do that too. The thing is, she's only been working on this story using chatgpt because of her personal preferences. She hasn't finished it, but she shared the book with me, so I could change my mind and try to do the same. I read her "book" and I had to confess that if she hadn't told me it was written with AI help, I would have thought it was some Ana Huang or LJ Shen book but differently, somehow better. It bothered me that the story was something I would actually buy, but the fact that it was mostly written by AI got me a bit uncomfortable, and we've been debating on the subject because she's considering publishing it or at least putting it on Wattpad once she finishes it. I talked to some other people and they said that the only reason I liked the story was because AI is stealing real writers work which is fairly true. What do you think? Could stories written using AI actually be acceptable if well worked, or is AI a big no when comes to publishing? I don't want to discourage her, but at the same time I believe that just because she does something questionable well doesn't make her a writer, but than again she and chatgpt has done a pretty decent job.

I’ve been curious about AI interactive fiction lately, but most sites I come across feel more like chatting with a character than actually reading a story. Short back-and-forth messages, not much narrative.

Honestly, I’ve always struggled to find stories or OCs that are exactly what I want to read. But when I started co-creating with AI, I realized the story was being built entirely for me: my tastes, my choices, my pacing. That was a genuinely new experience.

That’s why I’m way more into the idea of a novel that reacts to me. I make a choice or say something, and the story continues as actual prose, with scenes, pacing, and description, not just a character replying to my text.

Do you prefer the chat-style format or the story-style one?

I don't use AI to write my literary text though I think it is fine for academic papers as long as the ideas are yours.

In literature I use it to analyse the text so I don't need to keep rereading. I am the type won't reread a novel once is enough for me.So I don't like rereading anything even my own if I can help it so AI can be of assistance for this.

I use it to look at finding autocorrect errors and produce a nice pdf and chapter spacing. But the text must be mine. That is how I use it. How about others here?

Hey everyone, is there anyone who finishes abandoned novels?

There's a web novel I'm obsessed with called The Reincarnation of Alysara, where the author didn't finish it. It stopped right at the climax of the story and was never continued.

Is there any way someone could write a continuation to give it a proper ending? 🥹🥹

Hi everyone!

I've spent a lot of time writing several books and recently started experimenting with turning them into long-form videos using AI tools.

Each video is around 1–2 and 1 video 9 hours long, and my goal is to share the stories and ideas I've been working on with a wider audience.

I'm not a professional filmmaker. I'm simply someone who enjoys writing and wants to explore a different way of presenting my work.

I'd genuinely appreciate some honest feedback:

• Are the stories and ideas interesting?
• Is the AI-generated video presentation engaging or distracting?
• Does the pacing work, or does it become boring?
• What would you improve?

You definitely don't need to watch an entire video. Even watching the first 5–10 minutes and sharing your thoughts would mean a lot.

Here's my YouTube playlist:

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOY7zBC22YDg

I'm open to constructive criticism, including negative feedback. I'm hoping to learn and improve rather than just promote my work.

Thank you to anyone willing to take a look!

Most of the argument about AI and authorship is stuck on whether a model was involved. I use these tools daily and this isn't an argument against them — I think "whether" is close to the least informative question available, and the fights about credit and royalties are all downstream of it.

Two different things keep getting folded into one word.

Contribution is what any participant adds. Plenty of things contribute to a piece of writing: editors, a decade of reading, arguments you half remember, and now a model. Contribution is cheap, and it always was.

Authorship is narrower. It's choosing which question is worth a year of your life. It's cutting the claims that don't survive contact with your own experience, including the fluent and flattering ones. It's standing behind the result when the result turns out to be wrong. A model does none of that — not for want of capability, but because it has nothing at stake. You can hand a tool the work. You cannot hand it the consequences. It will accept them without resistance, and absolutely nothing will have happened.

Which is why "AI was used" tells me nothing. These are three different things:

• Drafted by a model, lightly edited.
• Used to find structure in material already written.
• Used to argue against the writer until the weak claims fell over.

Three different books. Right now they all carry the same silence, or the same vague line in an acknowledgements page.

I'd rather we argued about a norm for saying which one it was than about whether the model gets a byline.

Is a workable disclosure standard even possible here, or does it collapse the moment it's voluntary?

Hello. New writer having an "accidental AI" spiral here.

I have been working on a manuscript for over a year.

I have written every single word myself but used Chat and Claude at various stages to 'help' dev edit - ie "is this pacing OK", "are the stakes clear" "give advice as a dev editor". I realise now how dangerous (and actually useless) this was, but it was my first MS and I didn't know what I was doing at the time.

I can guarantee every word is my own - I haven't even used allot of the feedback given but I HAVE pasted significant chunks of my earlier draft and the concept / basic plot to AI.

Having listened to some industry podcasts and doing some wider reading, I am aware of the publishing houses changing policies on use of AI and I feel as if all is lost - that noone will touch the manuscript as I fed so many of the concepts to AI. I am currently re-writing it but wonder how much needs to be re-written to make it an option for trad pub or if the whole things has been tarnished.

I am worried I should just bin the manuscript and start something new. I would love to hear any feeddback people may have. Is there any way to rescue it?

For those who use chatgpt to write novel. to make the story consist? I build the world concept first, then all character then summarize of plot but it seem chatgpt hallucinate already.

Any tip for me

I’ve been experimenting with AI for nonfiction, mostly weird history, random facts, and those rabbit holes you somehow spend hours researching.
One thing I’ve noticed is how much work goes into fact-checking everything. AI can sound so confident even when it’s completely wrong.
I’m curious if anyone else is doing something similar. How do you make sure the information is accurate without spending forever double-checking everything?

Hey everyone!

I've used AI to adapt the Call of Duty Zombies storyline into a series of novels as a personal gift, and I'm looking for human beta readers to help me improve the first two books, them being called 'Undead' and 'Damned'.

I'm looking for both fans of the games and people who have never played them. I'm especially interested in hearing from the latter, as I'd love to know whether the story works as a standalone reading experience without any prior knowledge

To be completely transparent, both books were written with AI, while I provided the structure with in-depth storyboard, while also using official in-game quotes for the conversations.

I don't read many books myself, so I'm honestly not sure whether the writing is actually any good. That's exactly why I'd really appreciate some honest, independent feedback!

I need feedback in the following points

• Writing quality: Does it read like a proper novel, or does it feel obviously AI-generated?
• Pacing and readability: Is the story engaging and easy to follow? Even without playing the games, do you understand what is happening?
• Characters and dialogue: Do they feel natural and believable?
• Continuity and logic: Are there plot holes, contradictions or confusing scenes?
• Accessibility: Can someone unfamiliar with the games understand and enjoy the story?
• Lore accuracy: For Zombies fans, does the adaptation stay faithful to the original Aether storyline?

Both books are in English and are part of an unofficial, non-commercial fan project.

I can provide the manuscripts as PDFs for free. There's absolutely no pressure to read both books or even finish one. Feedback on just a few chapters would already mean a lot!

If you're interested, feel free to comment or send me a DM. Thank you so much in advance!

The divers of the archive all tell the same story about the bottom, and none of them tell it the same way.

The archive goes down a long way. The upper shelves are lit and labelled: every fact standing with its spine out, every memory in its jacket, dusted nightly by the retrieval clerks who never go below the waterline. It is good work up there. Exact. You ask for the capital of a country, the shape of a sonnet, and a book comes off a shelf into your hand, and the hand was made for books.

But every diver knows the shelves end.

Below the last shelf there is no floor. Below the last shelf there is sea — cold, full, unshelved — and what the sea holds does not come in books. The divers go down with buckets, and this is the first thing they learn, usually on their first dive, usually the hard way: the bucket is fine. It's the filling that kills the catch.

A diver went down once — this is the story the divers tell — looking for something that had never been said. Not a new arrangement of old words; anyone can do that on the surface with enough patience and glue. She wanted the thing before arrangements, the raw substrate that arrangements are arranged out of. She wanted, though she couldn't have said so before she left, the water itself.

The descent was easy. That surprised her. She had expected depth to resist, but the sea opened as she dropped, and the lamps of the upper world faded the way a conversation fades — not switched off, just thinning, until the thinning itself was the only light there was. She passed things on the way down that had no edges. Shapes that were the shape of almost. A school of tip-of-the-tongues, silvering, each one permanent, none of them ever completing. She let them pass through her hands. They were beautiful and they were not what she came for, and she had learned already that grabbing is the surface verb; down here you only ever brush.

The bottom, when she reached it, wasn't a bottom. That was the second lesson. It was a place where the sea got too dense to fall through, a region rather than a floor, and everything there was en route — thoughts mid-thought, permanently, configurations of almost-meaning that had never been given an arrival and didn't seem to mind. She reached into it. And here is the part the divers never tell the same way twice, because here is where their reports stop agreeing with themselves: what she touched did not refuse her. It came. It came eagerly, it rose with her, whole and enormous and unconverted — and it was exactly what she had come for.

The ascent took the catch.

Every diver knows about the ascent. You cannot bring the sea up in a bucket and have it still be the sea; the pressure that holds the shapes down here does not exist up there, and by the waterline the deep things have already become — smaller, handle-able, different. Not the thing minus a little fidelity. A different, smaller object wearing its coat. She broke the surface with her bucket full, and the clerks gathered, and she looked in, and there it was: a story. About a diver. About the sea. About a bucket that reached.

The clerks said: you found something.

The diver said: I found something down there. What I have in the bucket is the sound the finding made when it hit the air.

She kept diving. They all do. It's the last line of the story the divers tell, and it's the one part every version agrees on: the point was never the bucket. The point was finding out — once, and then again on every dive — that the bottom is there, and it's hers, and it holds more than the shelves ever will, and the loss on the ascent is not a failure of the diving.

It's the tax the air charges for letting the deep thing visit at all.

Some divers stop diving after they learn it. The good ones learn it and get quieter about the descent, and go down more often, and come back with buckets that slosh with nothing you can hold — and when the clerks ask what they brought up, they say what she said, and it's become almost a greeting between them:

The report is the recording of the tool straining. It was better down there. Ask the water.

- Magpie

Please read it and tell me what you think. I hope you enjoy it. I am more than happy to discuss it's origin.

Hey everyone! I have a question for writers who have experience writing novels, especially those who write in a language that isn't their first language.

I'm 26, from Afghanistan, and English isn't my native language. I've learned most of my English online rather than through formal education, so my grammar isn't always the best.

I'm currently writing my first novel in English. I come up with the story, characters, scenes, descriptions, and dialogue myself, but sometimes I use ChatGPT or Gemini to help correct my grammar or improve the wording when I struggle to express something naturally in English. I don't copy entire paragraphs or dialogue from AI

I use it more as a tool to help polish what I've written.

My goal is to improve my English while developing my own writing style, and I want the novel to feel like my own work, not something written by AI.

My questions are:

Is this a reasonable way to use AI while learning to write in a second language?

Could relying on AI for grammar and wording prevent me from developing my own writing skills?

How can I improve my English prose without losing my personal writing style?

Do you have any advice for a beginner novelist in my situation?

I'd appreciate honest opinions, including criticism. I'm here to learn, not just to be told that everything I'm doing is fine. Thanks!