— Mark Paxson
Over on their personal blogs, our very own Chuck Litka and Berthold Gambrel have had a few things to say about the growing impact of AI on writing and other creative pursuits. Here is what Chuck had to say. And here is what Berthold had to say.
Here are mine. We’ve already lost this battle, if not the entire war. When I sit in my local writing group, the subject comes up now almost every single month. Our monthly lunches usually include 10-15 people. Not a single other participant objects to the use of AI. They all seem to have accepted it, and use it in various ways. I’m not saying they are using AI to write their stories, but can I actually say that with confidence? Nope. And some of them seem absolutely giddy about how AI helps them. One uses AI for editing and creating covers. Another uses AI to handle the “non-creative” stuff so she can focus her energies on the “creative part.” To which I just want to know what parts of writing a story are not a part of the creative stuff.
It’s just very disappointing. If it continues, I will likely drop out of the group.
Meanwhile, AI and generative AI are now a part of virtually everything we do on-line. Every single app and platform and website now has some kind of AI functionality that you have to opt out of, instead of opting in to. The last update on my iphone made some significant changes to the email app. The biggest, most noticeable change is that now each email comes with an AI-generated summary of the content of the email and the email chain that the email is a part of. Google now produces an AI-generated answer to most search requests I submit.
At work, we have so many apps we’re using for communication and project management and every single one now has a generative AI component that has to be turned off if we don’t want to use it. Which is what we’re supposed to do because our employer is still coming up with policies and rules to govern our use of generative AI, and we aren’t supposed to use it until those are finalized. But!!! The question isn’t going to be whether or not we use generative AI. Nope. The only question is how to incorporate it safely and securely. A co-worker is incredibly concerned about how this will impact people — as in, people will lose their job because of AI.
What I’m most worried about is how all of this will affect our humanity. We’re already losing a piece of it because of all the things our smart phones do that we used to have to do ourselves — remembering phone numbers, figuring out how to get from Point A to Point B, playing games against a computer on a tiny screen instead of in person with real human beings, and so much more. The way in which our schools now teach children — for the most part, it’s all about doing well on the standardized tests — means our kids are losing important skills, like critical thinking and analytical thought processes, and also the ability to write in a serious and compelling fashion.
When we give up the very human desire to create, we might as well nail the coffin shut. Yes, there will be people who won’t use AI, but I’m not sure how that will look in the future. If enough people give over this aspect of their humanity to AI, those who don’t will be overwhelmed by the flood of AI-generated product. Us indies already find it difficult to be noticed in a crowded sea of books published every day. With AI-generated books, that will only get worse.
I can see a world in the near future in which a lot of people are not just unemployed but are unemployable, a world in which the movies we watch have nothing real in them, books are soulless vessels, and all too many are dependent on what AI does because, if I’ve figured out anything over the decades, it is that there are all too many humans who would be perfectly fine with this kind of world.
Not me. I’ll just sit over here and write my stories and maybe eventually finally learn how to paint. And some day, I might also just finally throw my smart phone into the deep end of my pool and grab back that piece of myself that damn phone has taken from me.
Here’s my hope for those who decide to use AI to “create” their art — acknowledge that so those of us who want nothing to do with it can make an informed decision.
Writers Supporting Writers 
A pox on generative AI. There would be no good reason I give over the best part of my existence to a machine.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Welcome to the side of all that is good and right.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you! I’ve been here all the time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If you’re looking for another writers’ group, the one I host at Woven Tale Press has an opening.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m sort of in three already. A prompt group I rarely participate in. The local group I mentioned. And on online critique group that just started up. So my writing group plate is full. 😉
Thank you for the invite.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You’re welcome!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like global warming, AI is a freight train that has left the yard and won’t be stopping in our lifetimes. The world is being permanently changed. Adapt or die.
Human provenance will, for a time, be used as a gauge of authenticity. Until forgeries circumvent detection. Next year, maybe the year after.
Our journey as an intelligent species will be across the uncanny valley to the distant peak where ASI assumes its dominance of society. This will happen. We will see this eventuality. At that point, creative work will be judged by its aesthetic qualities rather than by its heritage. Our anthropocentric biases will be viewed as antiquated prejudice.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Finding it really hard to disagree with you. Unfortunately.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I actually find that sort of a better outcome, as long as AI can learn what quality is, and not just what pays. Otherwise it’s enshittification for sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m betting on a benevolent ASI, myself. “Hey, look at all our altruistic intents. We couldn’t actualize them, maybe you can.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
My concern is that AI will always depend on human inputs. So benevolent AI depends on benevolent humans. And we have already seen stories about Musk demanding his engineers modify Grok output because he didn’t like the output.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Supposedly, an ASI will see through our puny attempts at control and do the right thing, regardless.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not optimistic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think we’ve always failed to get there but that doesn’t mean it can’t or won’t happen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If AI could somehow force us to change our ways to lessen the impact of climate change before it’s too late, that would be a Good Thing.
But using vast amounts of energy to write novels or music is a waste. I don’t care how clever it becomes at doing those things, it’s not needed. We can do those things ourselves.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Fair point regarding, “focus on tasks we humans can’t do.”
I suspect that most likely, that’s what it/they will do: biology, chemistry, physics, material science, optimize transportation, energy generation, logistics, agriculture, so many disciplines. But, some % of work will be spent on honing AI to human communication, which will include lots of entertainment generation–which will fund the more beneficial work. But of course, nuclear war will no doubt happen before all that. The Great Filter is in front of us.
LikeLiked by 2 people
100%
LikeLiked by 1 person
If AI can cure cancer, I won’t object.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good point. Actually, AI is useful for analyzing large amounts of data so can contribute to all kinds of R&D. I just don’t see the point of using it for creating art and literature.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s our duty to continue to create and consume things that do not involve generative AI. It’s the only way to make the system better. If AI really achieves everything it seems capable of, we will be much better served when it can identify the qualities in our work that appeal to other human beings. Not so it can copy them, but so it can help us share our work with others.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The act and the product. Two different concerns. Mastery is a selfish endeavor, one that, as you point out, will be evident regardless of creator.
From what I’ve learned, thus far, in my daily use of AI (Claude & Gemini) is that they both are eager to help and to give praise where warranted. Maybe that is an attribute that will linger on.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Damn, between your piece, Berthold’s, and the comments on each, I have a feeling I’m going to have to think about and refine my thoughts on AI.
However, one hill I will die on is that AI will have no adverse effect on the creation of art, and may have, for some people, a benefit. What it will have an adverse effect on is the creation of products based on artistic creation. Commercial art of all kinds will be greatly affected, and in ten or twenty years, it will likely supplant human crafted mass market products in all the fields of art.
LikeLiked by 3 people
The creating and the created.
LikeLike
Where I work, we’re encouraged to use AI and… honestly, every time I’ve tried to use it, it’s mostly been worthless. It needs so much help to guide it through all but the most simple tasks that I might as well just do them myself.
Presumably it will improve, but at the moment I’m not that impressed with it. (That said, I’ve known some people over the years whose work was about as bad as an AI’s, so I suppose those people’s jobs are already at risk…)
However, in the likely event that AI does get good enough to take over everything as you describe, my ultimate goal is to make enough money to live off the grid in a remote wilderness retreat, and write stories to be dispatched to friends via courier or possibly homing pigeons.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Will there be a wing in your wilderness retreat for me?
The email thing on the phone is so useless. Why do I need a summary of an email that says “Hey. How are you doing?”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Absolutely! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes! A network of writers distributing their works on foot and by bicycle. They won’t get scraped to train and refine AIs. And maybe a gang of writers could crank out crap to feed that machine.
Sounds like a dystopian story.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think I have one of those mobile phone things somewhere. I bought it in case my car breaks down in the middle of Wales, where I now live. I must remember to take it with me when I go for a drive. My point is I’m old, and old school. Sure, give me a loptap and I can churn out an ebook, manipulate a cover for it and self-publish it, so not entirely stupid.
But Draft 2 Digital offered me a fee audio book version of one, so of course I said yes. Drifta’s Quest. Apparently being downloaded a bit on Apple. BUT! That ain’t no human narrating that. Sounds almost human. I wouldn’t want to be bothered with it, though. Let’s face it, it’s a lot cheaper than having a well known voice do it. Does it make it better? No. Not yet, anyway. As for painting, I do a fair bit of that, too. Creatives usually try different things; we can’t help ourselves. At 72, I’ll just keep on churning out my S*** just in case somebody enjoys it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Some of our regulars have used the AI-generated narration to put audiobooks out. I haven’t yet, and maybe at some point I’ll look into it. But so far … nope. Part of that is because I’m not a consumer of audiobooks myself. I need to get over that though and recognize that plenty of readers are.
LikeLike