![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
"Thoughts are swarming my mind like a nest of cyber-rats."
I haven't tried Sudowrite, and I probably won't try Sudowrite, because it's rather a bit pricier than the alternatives like NovelAI or HoloAI (both of which I have tried) or whatever. I don't doubt that it's better, given that it's using GPT-3.5/4, rather than the less powerful (at least for now) models used by those others.
But ignoring those specifics, just generally speaking, my take on novels/novellas/whatever written by AI is this: as long as you are completely upfront and transparent about the thing you wrote with an AI being written by an AI, then I'm fine with it. You say, "Hey, look at this cool thing that this AI wrote for me," then I'll probably take a look at it and be, "Oh, that's neat."[1] I've certainly done that myself, after all. And honestly, I'd rather read a fair-to-middling story written by an AI or a human/AI collaboration than read piss-poor dreck written solely by a human.
However, if you show me a thing and then say, "Hey, look at this cool thing that I wrote," I don't care how amazingly good it might or might not be, if I find out that you actually didn't write it, but instead it was written mostly or entirely by an AI, then I'm going to be way more blasé about it, at the very least. More likely, though, I'll be actively antipathetic toward it. Or, rather, toward you. Just as I would be if you came up and said, "Hey, look at this thing I wrote," and it turned out that another not-you human was the one who wrote it.[2] And, let's be honest here, anything you get an AI to write for you, at least for now, is going to be the equivalent to something written by not-you humans, given that these AIs are trained on the writing of not-you humans. Even if you supply it with samples of your own writing, it's still going to be pulling from the writing of other not-you humans (unless, somehow, it's an AI that was trained solely on your own writing and nothing else).
TL;DR version: I think there's a place for AI-written stuff. And I think there's a place for human/AI collaborative efforts, as long as the human is honest about it. I don't, however, think that there's a place for humans passing off AI-written stuff as human-written stuff. Or, at least, I don't think there should be a place for it. And I'm not sure how I feel about humans directly profiting (whether it's monetarily or "just" reputational or whatever) off of the "work" of AI, regardless of whether the human is upfront about it or not, given that AIs are trained on the works of other, not-them, humans (willing/knowingly or, as is most likely the case, not so). If I had to say how I felt about it, I would say it feels a little hinky to me, at very best.
[1] - Disclaimer: I have not read The Electric Sea, and I'm not sure I'm going to. I'd guess that it's still worthy enough of an "oh, that's neat" and all, but I'm simply not all that interested in reading the whole thing myself, at least not at the moment. There it is, though, for anyone else (or even myself, later) who may want to give it a read.
[2] - Just take a look at my review of Reality Hunger: A Manifesto by David Shields if you want to see how I feel about the subject of plagiarism (or almost-plagiarism or plagiarism-in-everything-but-name). Essentially, I felt strongly enough about it that it's one of the few books on Goodreads for which I wrote an actual review as opposed to just leaving a star rating. Not to put too fine a point on it, I'm not a big fan of plagiarism, whether it's wrapped up in pretentious bullshit or not.
I haven't tried Sudowrite, and I probably won't try Sudowrite, because it's rather a bit pricier than the alternatives like NovelAI or HoloAI (both of which I have tried) or whatever. I don't doubt that it's better, given that it's using GPT-3.5/4, rather than the less powerful (at least for now) models used by those others.
But ignoring those specifics, just generally speaking, my take on novels/novellas/whatever written by AI is this: as long as you are completely upfront and transparent about the thing you wrote with an AI being written by an AI, then I'm fine with it. You say, "Hey, look at this cool thing that this AI wrote for me," then I'll probably take a look at it and be, "Oh, that's neat."[1] I've certainly done that myself, after all. And honestly, I'd rather read a fair-to-middling story written by an AI or a human/AI collaboration than read piss-poor dreck written solely by a human.
However, if you show me a thing and then say, "Hey, look at this cool thing that I wrote," I don't care how amazingly good it might or might not be, if I find out that you actually didn't write it, but instead it was written mostly or entirely by an AI, then I'm going to be way more blasé about it, at the very least. More likely, though, I'll be actively antipathetic toward it. Or, rather, toward you. Just as I would be if you came up and said, "Hey, look at this thing I wrote," and it turned out that another not-you human was the one who wrote it.[2] And, let's be honest here, anything you get an AI to write for you, at least for now, is going to be the equivalent to something written by not-you humans, given that these AIs are trained on the writing of not-you humans. Even if you supply it with samples of your own writing, it's still going to be pulling from the writing of other not-you humans (unless, somehow, it's an AI that was trained solely on your own writing and nothing else).
TL;DR version: I think there's a place for AI-written stuff. And I think there's a place for human/AI collaborative efforts, as long as the human is honest about it. I don't, however, think that there's a place for humans passing off AI-written stuff as human-written stuff. Or, at least, I don't think there should be a place for it. And I'm not sure how I feel about humans directly profiting (whether it's monetarily or "just" reputational or whatever) off of the "work" of AI, regardless of whether the human is upfront about it or not, given that AIs are trained on the works of other, not-them, humans (willing/knowingly or, as is most likely the case, not so). If I had to say how I felt about it, I would say it feels a little hinky to me, at very best.
[1] - Disclaimer: I have not read The Electric Sea, and I'm not sure I'm going to. I'd guess that it's still worthy enough of an "oh, that's neat" and all, but I'm simply not all that interested in reading the whole thing myself, at least not at the moment. There it is, though, for anyone else (or even myself, later) who may want to give it a read.
[2] - Just take a look at my review of Reality Hunger: A Manifesto by David Shields if you want to see how I feel about the subject of plagiarism (or almost-plagiarism or plagiarism-in-everything-but-name). Essentially, I felt strongly enough about it that it's one of the few books on Goodreads for which I wrote an actual review as opposed to just leaving a star rating. Not to put too fine a point on it, I'm not a big fan of plagiarism, whether it's wrapped up in pretentious bullshit or not.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}