Seeing a minor spike in very obviously "AI" generated submissions so far this year. One didn't even hide and tried to claim in a cover letter that it was "there right" to do so. When certain (like this one), bans were issued.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I really don't understand why people would do this... It's such a soulless way to try and influence a genre, which is supposed to be challenging and extending our understanding of what it means to be human and our role in the universe.
Government or corporate controlled AI bots consume all new ideas and automatically alter them to be in line with the most 'productive' and 'trending' topics, new ideas are launched like iPhones yearly and only the super rich can afford to update their thinking regularly.
Thanks. I occasionally draw between diving in all the money I make writing short stories, throwing it in the air, letting it hit me on the head, et cetera
It must be tiring swimming through all that cash like Scrooge McDuck. But at least its good cardio. Would love to see your illustrations in a graphic novel of someone like Becky Chambers books, such as A Long Way to a Small Angry Planet or the like. Your art style would so compliment the aesthetic 😄
Intriguing issue. I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' adage about technology. Those born into an AI world will see it as the most natural thing to aid their writing and storytelling. On the other hand, in a chess tournament for instance, how much if any assistance is (Superhuman) AI allowed to give?
People equate ideas with inventions and copyright. Ideas aren't protected. You can have an idea for the greatest screenplay in the world, but until you write it, you haven't done the work. The WORK is protected. If AI does the work, all you ever had was an idea and that's worthless.
Yep. If you look at businesses too, the "idea guy" is almost always just the money guy. Everyone has ideas. You either gotta put in the work or have the capital to compel other people to do it for you.
My father was a patent/trademark/copyright attorney. I was very excited when I thought I understood the job and fed him several million-dollar ideas, only to be told that until I could hand over the finished product, I couldn't have a million-dollar patent.
Given that my own editorial tenure predated the rise of AI submissions by roughly a global pandemic and a half, I send sincere sympathy for your burden, and assurance that you’ve borne it with more grace than some of us might have managed.
there's likely to be a strong incentive not to do that, in that any detail provided could hypothetically be used to make the ai output harder to detect in the future, right?
Comments
https://youtu.be/YB3S4v_9388?si=dF7PdNRtamkPLzxS
My (poorly written) stories include my experiences, even if I don't write nonfiction.
Reading AI's rehashed content is like drinking stagnant pond water when I'm thirsty. It's about quick $, nothing more.
There's definitely a recognizable vibe when you see a lot of generated text, but it's hard to put into specific words how to recognize it.
It's going to be hard for new slush readers and editors. Having the pre-"AI" experience with slush is very valuable.
I fear that recognizing generated content becomes specialized enough that the general populace just has to trust an authority. That can be abused. :\