Pages

Wednesday, October 4, 2023

Is A.I. going to replace writers? That's the question on this month's edition of the IWSG.


Welcome to the October 2023 edition of the Insecure Writer's Support Group. Here's a LINK you can click on to sign-up (if you've somehow managed to land on my blog without already following one). And if you would like to know more, just keep on reading :).

What is the purpose of the Insecure Writer's Support Group?: It's to share and encourage. Writers can express doubts and concerns without fear of appearing foolish or weak. Those who have been through the fire can offer assistance and guidance. It’s a safe haven for insecure writers of all kinds, so it's perfect for a lot of people actually :).

When do y'all post?: You may be able to tell, because of the date this post was published. But, the first Wednesday of every month is officially Insecure Writer’s Support Group day. To participate, you should post your thoughts on your own blog. You might want to talk about your doubts and the fears you have conquered, or you could discuss your struggles and triumphs. If you can, offer a word of encouragement for others who are struggling, and visit others in the group and connect with your fellow writer. As a rule of thumb, you should aim for a dozen new people each time and return comments. This group is all about connecting. Be sure to link to this page and display the badge in your post. And please be sure your avatar links back to your blog. Otherwise, when you leave a comment, people can't find you to comment back.

Here's some more housekeeping:

The X (formerly known as Twitter) handle is @TheIWSG and the relevant hashtag is #IWSG.

The awesome co-hosts for the October 4 posting of the IWSG are Natalie Aguirre, Kim Lajevardi, Debs Carey, Gwen Gardner, Patricia Josephine, and Rebecca Douglass!

Every month, the people behind the IWSG announces a question that members can answer in their IWSG post. These questions may prompt you to share advice, insight, a personal experience or story. If you'd rather participate in this way, you should include your answer to the question in your IWSG post or let it inspire your post if you are struggling with something to say.

But, remember, that the question is optional :).

October 4th question: The topic of AI writing has been heavily debated across the world. According to various sources, generative AI will assist writers, not replace them. What are your thoughts?

My opinion is that generative A.I. is incredible. It can draw better than me, it can write better than me, and it never gets tired. I think that people should watch their back. Going into any liberal arts related field is probably a one way ticket into poverty unless you have some privilege (for example, you're the son of Stephen King and just want to be an author). If that's the situation, then being a nepo baby is definitely the way to go. As far as already established authors that pull down big salaries already? A.I. is a boon, because it will allow them to have a book mill without ever admitting to it. I mean...these are the times of Trump. So admitting to anything is just slitting your own throat. Even if some program came back and said that "it is 99% probable that this is a.i. written," a smart person should just say "allegedly.

Anyway, my opinions can be controversial. But a.i. has seriously blown me away on what it can do. I also wouldn't be insecure about it. As an individual person, you have no power to affect anything. The genie is out of the bottle, so you should adapt and pull on those bootstraps. And yes, I think generative A.I. will replace writers (in case I wasn't clear), and I'm saying, "Lots of writers." Unless (of course) there's legislation to force the people who have money to continue to pay people who write. If that happens, then it won't.

5 comments:

  1. I like how you hedge your bets at the end. Like I said on Alex's blog, I think it will eventually replace most genre fiction, the kind that can easily be churned out by a machine.

    The problem is, can these things really create anything? I mean at this point it's all just copying stuff. These things aren't really intelligent. They couldn't create Harry Potter; they can only imitate JK Rowling's stories. And you can say, "Harry Potter was based on this and this..." or "Superman was based on so and so..." But still those were only influences that were mashed together with some other influences filtered through the author's perspective. These "AI"s can't do that yet and it might be a while until they really can.

    Any writing that's supposed to actually be literature, ie art, is probably still safe because the "AI" doesn't have the ability to do that. Yet.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @P.T.: Is it "hedging" to say that legislation can force people to go with humans over a.i.? I don't think it is. For example, if there was a sugar that tasted exactly like sugar and had no side effects and was healthier than cane sugar, is it unreasonable to think that it might be outlawed to protect industries that profit from sugar and from people needing medicine to treat diabetes? It's the same thing. What a.i. can do is incredible, and it's efficient and cheap. This is a danger to the old way...the crusty way of charging a lot, being inefficient, and slow. But protecting that "old way" of doing things is within people's best interest. I'm arguing for the old way (just to be clear). Slow, crusty, inefficient, and human is the way to go. I've seen too many examples in my own life of how ruthless industry can be when it discards people like me for other things that can do it twice as fast, cheaper, and better. Personally, I just wish more people realized that they could be replaced, and realized how they actually don't have any skills at all that a.i. can't reproduce. Then they'd be more humble and accepting of what I have to say.

      Delete
  2. Pandora's Box has been opened. And no, I don't envy any young person with a creative degree right now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AI can't draw. It'll spit out a pretty picture it complied from other artists' styles, but it's not drawing anything.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ultimately, why buy books if you can go to the AI and generate exactly what you want to read? It won't just take down the writers. It'll take down publishing as a whole. And those deep pockets will definitely fight back.

    ReplyDelete