#this is about AI use in creative writing and my opinion on that won't ever change

[elf-trash]

reposting this bc the OP blocked me (and is blocking anyone else who disagrees which means blocked people can't reblog) and i want to say this loud and with my whole chest!!!!!

another Dragon Age fic was recently outed as being AI, and this is what the writer had to say for themselves about it:

so actually, Grammarly uses generative AI and is just as bad as ChatGPT. it also objectively makes your writing worse, it sucks the voice out of your prose and turns it into corporate sounding homogenized paste. it's also unethical for all the same reasons any generative AI is unethical. get a writing group and have a real human beta read for you if you don't trust yourself to check your own grammar etc. but honestly something unpolished and written entirely by your human brain and human imagination will ALWAYS be better than AI slop.

also, the part about published authors doing this is patently untrue. i know this is a huge problem in the self-publishing space, but most publishers now are including clauses in their contracts that expressly forbid the use of AI in ANY part of the creative process. this includes using ChatGPT to generate or clean up outlines or Grammarly to spellcheck and revise. so if you're trying to publish, don't fucking do this or you could literally be asked to return an advance if you get caught.

i've posted about this in the past, but AI detectors are actually shocking accurate these days. i've tested them extensively recently and they can consistently and correctly flag individual sentences written by ChatGPT in an otherwise original passage. and they almost never flag false positives. so the argument that AI detectors can't be trusted is just flat out wrong. are they correct 100% of the time? no. but can they indicate with a high degree of accuracy if AI was used in some capacity? absolutely, especially if there is additional evidence.

and for all the people hand wringing about AI detectors flagging false positives, let me just say this: if something is not AI written it is very easy to prove. you can't write anything of any considerable length without leaving a massive paper trail of notes and drafts. almost all writing software tracks changes and makes it very easy to prove you wrote something yourself. being falsely being accused of AI isn't actually a real problem and is only being made to seem as such by people who are trying to get away with and justify using AI or who are worried about getting caught.

i think a lot of people are just lured by a seemingly easy shortcut, and to their untrained eye, what the AI is spitting out feels "better" to them than their own writing. but i promise you it's not. trust your own brain and put in the work to improve at your craft rather than outsourcing the gift of your imagination to a robot that steals from other people's work.

i will continue to die on this hill!!!!!

[ale-rosa-paula]

Can we calmly talk about AI art for a while?

Let's start reading this comment section down below. It's a real comment section from some AI art posted somewhere. I did it like this because I didn't want to expose anyone. I just want to talk or, should I say, express my opinion on this matter and maybe, just maybe, call people for a much needed reflection about AI Art. Let's try it...

16 comments

Person 1: the name of this place? 8 months

⎯⎯ Person 2: It’s art 6 months

Person 3: I think is mamonia in Morocco 3 weeks

Person 4: OMG what an exquisite, Marvelous inspirational Vision. 8 months

⎯⎯ Person 5: It wasn't created by a human, it has no soul 8 months

Person 6: this is Morocco or Spain 7 months

⎯⎯ Person 7: It is persain from Iran 2 months

Person 8: it is an ai art bro 3 weeks

Person 9: does it look ai? or is it just me??? 8 months

Person 10: it's ai art 8 months

Person 11: Beautiful 🤩 8 months

Person 12: ideal place ♥️♥️♥️ 4 months

Person 13: Мне нравится! Спасибо (I like it! Thank you!) 8 months

Person 14: Love it ❤️ 3 months

Person 15: Love it ❤️ 6 months

Person 16: it's AI 7 months

Me: Well... It's AI and it's also beautiful. No AI can create on its own. Someone has to give it the right prompts, the right ideas. And, not just nowadays, but always, having good ideas is also a way of being a creative person, an artist sometimes. (Let's think about the example of artists that are writers... They don't always draw, but they have good ideas and they create something that can be breathtaking based on ideas, thoughts).

So... If people are marveling at this concept (thought by a real person), than I think this AI art has a soul. It does have the soul of the person who thought about it.

It's a big and ever changing world, guys. It will always have space for all of us, and for all kinds of manifestations of art and ideas and thoughts. Maybe it's passed time we accept AI art is a reality now, it has come to stay, it's earning non-artists people appreciation, and it seems to me that there's nothing wrong whit that.

And do we know, why? Because real artists will always be supported and loved and respected. AI won't change that. Again, I repeat: there's space for every aspect of art manifestation. Let's share and love more, instead of try and dictate what people can or cannot like. Let's grow up together, folks. The world will always change. Dealing with the new can be scary sometimes, but is also necessary.

And for those of you who may be curious about this "infamous" AI art, that has prompted me to write this post, here it is (with source but with no source...)

After reading it all (in case you did) what do you think? Is Zulfia a creative person, a new kind of vehicle for art manifest itself? Or maybe just someone with random ideas and a very powerful tool at their disposal?

PS: I'm a Brazilian person but I decided to write this post in English so that we can widen this conversation (maybe?...) But I intend on making another one in Portuguese (in case this one gains some traction).

[thefloatingstone]

After looking into the writers predicament and how it all led to the strike it made me realize that perhaps one of the reasons for the decline in quality media is becuase writers have been given less and less incentives to create good content, do you have any thoughts?

I don't think it would be exactly incentive. I would think in a certain amount of cases it would be down more to demotivation. Generally, writers for film and TV and such genuinely WANT to make a good story and, much like fanfic writers and fanartists, will do their best for very little thanks simply because it's what they DO. But not ever show or movie is going to be a passion project, in fact most of them won't. And if you're working for Disney especially, who owns 38% of all film (not counting TV and other media) so you most likely WILL end up wroking for Disney, you are going to have a TON of studio meddling on every level of writing.

As I mentioned in the other post, Mr Rick And Morty (sorry I don't know his name and I'm too lazy to check) wrote the story for the Dr Strange and the Multiverse of madness at LEAST twice when the movie's FIRST story and script was scrapped by a previous writer. The first script he wrote was heavily rewritten and changed and reworked by the studio. and then the studio just THREW OUT that script and he had write a brand NEW script 2 weeks before shooting started using all the props, sets, outfits and CG segments they had already made. And the thing is this is now STANDARD PRACTICE in working on a big budget Disney film.

Part of the reason the Barbie movie is written as well as it is, is because Mattel were almost completely hands off with the film's writing. (the only changes I heard about was them censoring one Barbie saying the word "Motherfucker" which they censored in the film by putting a Mattel sticker over her mouth) and various other things like the removal of a narration in one scene and one or two jokes were cut. You know! NORMAL screenwriting practices!

But Disney is so paranoid and controlling with literally everything they put out it is a death sentence for any kind of creativity. Even ignoring the fact that they hire brand new writers who they can control and push around easier, I imagine even if you were NOT a new writer just happy for a big break, it must be extremely demotivating to try and write a good story when you know Disney is just gonna shred it to ribbons.

This is absolutely not the ONLY reason of course. Velma's writing is so godawful because people who had only worked in live action cable comedy thought they could do the exact same thing for an animated show and it would work without knowing anything about the medium they were working in because they were arrogant, lacked restraint, and had gotten where they were thanks to being friends with the right people. HGS is so badly written because Raye Rodriquez had shopped around his story idea to EVERYONE and got rejected by all of them until Crunchyroll needed fodder to justify opening up its own studio to create "originals". Many times modern cartoons are badly written because the actual people writing the show are animators who haven't had any formal training or education in creative writing.

There are a thousand and one reasons for WHY something ends up badly written. But as for why we have gotten SO MUCH that is badly written recently I would chalk up to studio execs and the business side of Hollywood choking the creativity out of the writing process in an attempt to maximize profits in the short term.

That's an EXTREME simplification but that would be my opinion. Hell the only reason AI writing is even a conversation regarding film and TV is because it's the kind of thing these studio execs are SALIVATING over the thought of. A writer they have 100% control over that they don't have to pay and don't have to deal with all that "creative vision" or "artistic expression" bullshit which they don't like because it represents risk to sure fire income.

because most Studio Execs are businessmen who have no concept of creativity whatsoever, have no idea what being creative even means, and yet they think because they know how to make money in a corporate sense, they know how to monetise creativity to maximum efficiency.

It's like a fisherman getting rid of all the fish in the sea because they're getting in the way of him monetising the ocean.

Anyway this ask is a mess because this is a complex issue I am trying to express a simplified opinion on. But I hope you get what I mean.

[randomboredhuman-blog]

Why I think AI art won't replace artists

AI art is a weird topic to me.

Because I draw and I write and I 3D model and a number of other creative pursuits, so I have experience with art, on both ends.

But I'm also a programmer, which means I know how these AI art engines work. And to me, there's a certain parallel to how I learned my art.

I mean sure I didn't randomly scribble in millions of different ways on a page until I matched a piece of art I liked, but I still started by copying pictures and other drawings. I even traced to try and work the right movements into my muscle memory.

The art created by AI, in my opinion, is just as original as my own work. And at my level that means it is pretty derivative.

Sure, I try and make my vision, but in a way, the AI image model is trying to create whatever it was told to by its user. And it does that by applying the patterns it has picked up during its training.

But neither I nor it have a style of our own yet.

And that's the rub, isn't it? I know I'm not a good artist because I haven't developed the vision to be one. I try, but my process right now is mostly thinking about what previous works I have experienced fit what I'm trying to convey and trying to match the patterns to try and achieve what I want.

And in a way, that's what an AI engine would do. Unless specifically prompted, it would match what it was asked to do with the art it has experienced and try and mimic those styles in order to try and achieve a result.

But that's the limit of what AI can do. It can only copy the styles it has been exposed to. It can't do anything new. Perhaps one day I will have my own style, and I can actually call myself a good artist. I might be able to do that.

The current generations of AI, however, can only ever copy existing styles. They can do that well, to the point of being able to create forgeries so perfect that you wouldn't be able to pick them out of a lineup. But it can't do anything novel.

And at the end of the day art is about deciding to do something, not just doing it. Anyone could make paintings like Jackson Pollock but he actually did, and that's what makes his art, well art.

And some of the people using AI image models aren't doing anything new, they are trying to fulfil a want quickly and cheaply. They aren't using it with intention.

It's the difference between taking a photo and using a camera to make art. And that comes down to the skill and intention of the user.

Current AI image generation can't replace artists because most of the users of AI art don't have the artistic skill to actually make art.

I think there is a future where AI artists exist, where the AI has been trained in a way that mimics humans learning art so as to encourage the creation of its own style. But that AI artist wouldn't be able to replace an artist. because it would be working in its own style that would resonate with people differently.

In the meantime, all we have are AI-enabled forgeries.

[ohnoitstbskyen]

I've recently seen some posts saying that arguing against AI art would lead to corporations cracking down on fanart and fanfiction. I've had this thought floating around in my brain ever since. Part of me wants to dismiss it, since I feel it isn't anywhere near the same. AI can't argue to have been inspired and to have added their own little heart into a piece, but you can't exactly define that in law. Most art is also conceptually not original. However, AI is assured to be using a combination of direct sample, just from too many sources. So... I don't know. I feel you are very well informed in these kind of matters and would like to hear your opinion.

There's a simple distinction there, which is that "AI art" algorithms are not people. They're not even AI, there is no artificial intelligence happening here. They are machine learning algorithms, not inherently different in nature to the ones serving you "ads relevant to your interests" on various websites right now.

"AI art" cannot be said to be creative because those machine learning algorithms are not people. People are creative. Sentient, sapient, thinking minds are creative. Machines are not. They simply execute whatever algorithm we've put in their black box.

The argument "AI" art enthusiasts very passionately try to make is that their prompts are creative, that the specific line of words they input into the machine which create the output, that is creative, that is transformative. And idk, maybe there's a court case to be fought over that, but to me that reads like saying if you manually input a Minecraft seed, you now deserve creative credit and copyright over the world that it generates, because your prompt is the generative element, not the underlying technology actually executing the output. Microsoft might have some expensive legal opinions about that idea.

The allegory I like to use is this: Imagine that you can't do a backflip. Then, someone sells you a robot which does backflips at the press of a button. Would you say that because you pressed the button that caused the backflip to happen, that means you have now done a backflip?

"I caused a backflip to exist, therefore I performed it!"?

I won't argue that it can be a tricky business to optimize an input for the art machine such that it produces a desired output, but the scope of what the machine can output is NOT defined by the person doing the input, but by the data-set that the machine has available to draw upon. You can tell an "AI art" program to produce "steampunk" artwork all you want, but if the machine doesn't have a big library of steampunk artwork in its database to draw upon, it will never produce steampunk outputs.

You can only prompt the machine to replicate that which has already been fed to it.

Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein and birthed the modern genre of science fiction because she had been disturbed by hearing stories about new experiments to stimulate dead tissue with electricity and seemingly restore it to life. To write it, she drew upon inspiration from everything from gothic horror to biblical themes to famous explorer's diaries. Mary Shelley created Frankenstein by synthesizing the accumulated experience of a lived life.

A machine learning algorithm could only ever create Frankenstein if you had already fed Frankenstein by Mary Shelley into its database.

[laindependencialuna1899]

I posted 2,034 times in 2022

That's 1,496 more posts than 2021!

226 posts created (11%)

1,808 posts reblogged (89%)

Blogs I reblogged the most:

@thoughtkick

@quotemadness

@marbodt

@animentality

@kineticpenguin

I tagged 66 of my posts in 2022

#rant - 7 posts

#vent - 5 posts

#philippines - 5 posts

#politics - 4 posts

#azur lane - 4 posts

#leni robredo - 2 posts

#deviantart - 2 posts

#ai art discourse - 2 posts

#kiko pangilinan - 2 posts

#original writing - 2 posts

Longest Tag: 122 characters

#a post on why you should support artists getting more notes than artists who are struggling in this site is giving twitter

My Top Posts in 2022:

#5

my only contribution to goncharov is an actual current events AU is possible and that's why all these russians are in italy and not current day russia

3 notes - Posted November 29, 2022

#4

I'm gatekeeping Tumblr from apologists. Go Leni-Kiko!!

6 notes - Posted May 7, 2022

#3

man, adult filomena was wiling to serve fymryn mene omg....

9 notes - Posted August 17, 2022

#2

I guess I'm making this post to make me feel better about the current political situation in the Philippines. I want you all to know that I proudly voted for Leni Robredo and Kiko Pangilingan as President and Vice President last May 9, 2022, and by the numbers it looks like Bongbong Marcos, the son of the dictator Ferdinand Marcos will become the next president of this country. Personally and professionally, I knew how the elections would go because Filipinos, in all honesty, are not educated voters. Only a handful are, and they have exploited the poor through vote buying. It seems people will only ever vote for you if you're well-known, "well-mannered" and a man. This country does not care about credentials, although HRs and job offers here will beg to differ.

For me, as a Filipino and a second time voter, the elections for broken democracies like the Philippines needed both the voters and politicians to know the nuances of how this country works and be at the height of knowing the implications of our history and politics before they can vote. I had been on this earth and godforsaken country for 24 years and people always voted like this. My parents, who always sided with the best choice of presidential candidates and politicians, never saw their good presidential bet win. Now Robredo, our "Liwanag sa Dilim" and Beacon of Hope, did not win because the other camp views us supporters as elitists and privileged for supporting and voting for her.

We needed Robredo and Pangilingan for the development of the Philippines. And other voters voted based on their opinions and feelings. Feelings won't feed you, it won't clothe you or give you a job, feelings won't shelter you. Even if it did, you are probably working for the Marcoses and Dutertes' troll farms and disinformation and misinformation machinery. Most Filipinos do not like hearing about facts and the truth, let alone be educated in the Philippine history. Martial Law is a fact. Martial Law is a part of Philippine history. And they would rather believe in fake news and misinformation? Shame on you.

Also, about Filipino artists and creatives. I beg of you, please do not stop commissioning Filipino artists because of our elections. We are not the US, you're not in any danger because we are not a big country. I honestly cannot relate to Filipino artists who commission because I opened my comms twice before and got zero comms, but please continue to support them. Filipino artists and creatives need the money just in case this country gets worse.

10 notes - Posted May 12, 2022

My #1 post of 2022

god i love gaia online

14 notes - Posted November 16, 2022

Get your Tumblr 2022 Year in Review →