Amazon with a LLM is scary. I could see them just creating their own novels and various books and just selling it directly to customers completely replacing the author. Amazon original or something
Did we forget that other than non-fiction writing, creating fiction, a work of art, is not the domain of a machine? If you do connect to a work, proposed as art, written by a machine, you are a poor reader, a supplicant to the MSM news, perhaps, or possessed of a machine heart. I see the advantages of it as a sophisticated algorithm to correct mechanics, usage, and grammar. Creativity, a domain of humans, is not possible. If it were, a recent article espousing the needed skills by employers in the next ten years wouldn't be led by creativity and analytical ability. Come on people, know the amazing thing you are as a human.
I agree with the writers block thing. My biggest issue in writing is sometimes being bogged down by the fact that I know its time to describe a certain setting. Ai easily helps give inspiration and examples
Thank you for not being scared. And presenting a fair and balanced argument. I want to see authors and designers grabbing AI and using it to its full potential. Instead, too many are burying their heads in the sand like scared ostriches. And i feel like, at the end of the day, that is going to be the end of the industry, not anything AI did or didn't do. What's that saying: You're only as relevant as your ability to keep learning.
I'm on the fence. AI definitely is good with generating writing prompts, so my productivity has gone to the next level. It's not up to my standard in terms of even considering just a copy and paste. I also use it for POD product descriptions -- I still clean it up and add my voice. Your own voice, still matters. In fact, it will always matter.💯 Love your positive attitude.❤😉💪🏾
I think you have the most realistic take on this that I've heard from anyone -- thank you for that. So many people out there are trying to convince people that AI is not a real threat; your approach of acknowledging that it's *already* a threat in some regards and that we should rather adapt to it is much more logical. You do a fantastic job analyzing what will & won't be "around" in the future. I'd say the only thing I disagreed with is the notion that AI won't be able to replicate a deeper level of understanding, such as the ability to recognize continuity or consistency problems -- personally I've already had success with getting GPT 4 to recognize those issues in a massive chunk of text; I think *currently* it still isn't up to par with editors, but it won't be long until it is, in my opinion. Overall, though, I loved your level-headed approach on this video; glad to have discovered your channel!
Thank you so much for this, your insights are so helpful, right on time and I feel because you go to the meetings, conventions and what have you’s you are out there seeing what is happening in the various aspects of the writing world so ….in keeping accordance with the ad of EF Hutton …..“ when Michael La Ron talks I listen”. At least I try to. Much respect Michael for all you do. 🙏🏼🙌
I am going to bring out a self-published book. My biggest concern is: How do I convince my reader that my book is 100% original, and not AI generated? What if my readers think: "Oh! This guy is a first-time writer. This is his first book, and it is self-published. Anyone can get his book self-published by paying a few bucks. Surely he must have used AI to generate most of the content." In other words, there are no credentials to back me or convince my readers that my book is indeed 100% original. In this age of AI, readers will always doubt the originality of a first-time writer, more so when his book is self-published (i.e. not published by any mainstream publisher).
Can I say that I have you to thank for publishing my first book. You gave me the confidence to believe in myself and my writing. All this new stuff, I am ambivalent...but I must try it out, to see how it might help me work faster and smarter. But I will always want to write what I want, not what AI thinks. I have used AI art for my cover, because I have been able to sample a 100+ very different ideas in a few minutes at no charge, which would be impossibly expensive with an illustrator. Although, if I even do make any money, I really would prefer to use a living breathing artist.
Thanks for such an insightful response to the topic. I’ve been hearing extreme views from both sides recently and it’s interesting to hear a balanced response. Yes it’s going to change the world, for better or for worse 🤷♂️. What is important is to stay positive, be as flexible and adaptable as possible and to keep educating yourself 👍👍👍
I enjoyed this video a lot. It’s important to reflect on the challenges we will face. I’m also optimistic. I take a lot of time to finish projects and AI will definitely improve my productivity, but changes are always scary. Embrace them is important to keep us fit for what’s coming. Hope to catch you online some day, not happening in April, but maybe in May.
Obsidian already has chatGPT integration through the "text generator" plugin. Even if you've got chatGPT for free, you can get an API key and put it into the text generator plugin. Now when I'm writing, I can hit ctrl+j and have chatGPT do its magic
I am not a writer, although I write all the time. I am a channel, a psychic who channels books, class materials, government proposals, and more. No artificial intelligence can do that. Artificial intelligence is a tool or a weapon, and what is behind the duality is inspiration.
Bro machines tap into frequencies all the time. Odds are your visions are manufactured spirituality by advanced ai mimicking meta physical experiences. Yes you have a soul fool
I'm a copywriter and I'm worried about AI but trying to be positive. Also, I am attending Writers Digest this year and I think I saw your name in the schedule!
I really appreciate this informative presentation about AI impacts on the future of writing. Especially witnessing the current Hollywood writers strike and fears about the future for AI and authentic creativity. Thanks.
I've been tinkering with AI for fiction writing. I have part of a novella that isn't all that bad. I at that halfway point to where I have hit writer's block. Once I've passed it, I will continue. I also have a rough first draft of a novellet that I used AI to help write with, I know needs lots of work. At least I have a beginning middle and ending and can flesh the story out more. I use AI as a tool and consider it as a writing partner.
I deeply appreciate these AI-writing videos because I always learn something useful that immediately changes my life/writing. So thank you so much for this great content.
I don't think creative writing was ever supposed to be monetized the way publishers and, ultimately, self-publishing allowed it to be. In the past decade so many people that don't truly understand or care for the craft of writing have gone into writing stories in order to make money. That is why many books are so derivative of other works and full of lifeless characters and stories that don't create a long-lasting impact. Personally, I consider AI to be helpful for people that actually like to write. As you mentioned, AI will make writer's block a thing of the past, and I've experienced that benefit myself. It is possible to write a good book (up to par with today's standard of top self-published work), but you have to prompt the AI in a specific way. You should start with an outline, created by yourself or by the AI just to have an idea about where you are headed and the stops on the way. Have the AI expand on each part of the outline. You can specify that the AI should write in first-person limited or first-person past tense, for example, if you want the story to be told in a way that is not third-person. The "chapters" AI creates will be short, so you need to have AI continue from where it left off in order to make the story the length of a novel. You can ask it to give suggestions for the next scene or give it prompts that involve your own ideas like, "Please continue from this point. Tim leaves the group to go to his truck. When he gets deep into the forest, he hears a noise, possibly a branch breaking. He checks his pocket, only to realize he left his keys with the others." Prompting with specific details allows AI to follow your direction so the story is more coherent and fits your vision. You have to guide the scenes and ask it to elaborate on certain parts or include specific details. Tell it you want a short description of a character included with a focus on his worn coat, for example. You decide what is important. You can tell it how the character is supposed to feel in a situation. You can tell AI what you want a character to say or give it a general idea about how a character should react. If you guide AI, have it rewrite parts you're not happy with, and add in a few extra touches on your own, you can write a good book with it, and it will take probably 10% or less of the time it would if you had to come up with all the writing. I think the reason people think AI can't write a good story is that the majority of people are only willing to put in the bare minimum effort. They ask it to write a fantasy story with mythical creatures and characters that go on a quest and wonder why the result is generic and boring. (The AI I have used is Chat GPT.) Eventually, I do think AI novels will flood the marketplace. These will be written poorly by people that are just trying to create a product in the hopes of making a buck. But that is not unlike before AI appeared. There were already so many books that didn't showcase a love of the craft of writing.
I find the aspect of AI writing to be interesting, but I can't stop thinking of how some characters will have the AI write an entire book and claim it as theirs. But I am still supportive of one form of AI writing, and that's AI editing, helping when you mess up or forget a word.
Great insights and food for thought. Thank you for the video. I also think the actual, real "human touch" is something AI will not be able to replicate.
I'm a retired engineer here with a recommendation for anyone looking to amplify their toolkit by building applications to handle certain tasks... Instead of Python, look into a language called, JULIA (your can also search JuliaLang). Here's why: 1. It's open source and available under the MIT license (yes, that MIT). 2. It is linguistically and syntactically even simpler for novice programmers to understand than Python. (Meaning, it won't read like C++ gibberish to you, but more like human language). 3. Python is notoriously slow. Julia is is not. One description of the language reads like a meme. It goes like this: "Looks like Python, feels like Lisp, runs like C/Fortran." 4. It's a general purpose language and building practically any kind of application or integration is possible. 5. It's incredibly well documented and has a vibrant development community and culture behind it. I hope that helps anyone who might be interested in diving in. As usual, thanks to Michael for timely and useful commentary for the community. I hope to complete my first publication before year's end and this channel will be a big part of that journey.
Great video! I've been writing for 30 years. I have 35 books. I doubt AI can replicate the 'feel' and 'struggle' of the human experience and our need to tell stories. But what do I know? I hear voices in my head and write down what they say . . . lol :)
Thank you for this. I have been excited about using AI as a grant writer until I found a website for AI-generated grant proposals. They said they could use AI to do them in 4 hours with a 95% acceptance rate for 1/10th the cost of a grant writer. Feeling a little down about it right now and wondering if we will be forced to churn out massive amounts of AI text just to make the same income that we used to. It's very, very difficult for me to believe that AI could get all the context and nuance correct for a 20 page proposal. But then again, maybe the reviewers really don't care if it's well written or not. Of course, it does beg the question, assuming the 95% acceptance rate is real, if it can be done by AI, maybe humans just need to step away from it? Not happy right now and worried that I will have to find a new profession.
It’s okay to feel down about this. What you probably aren’t seeing though is that that website is likely puffing up their numbers and the tool probably isn’t as effective as they claim. It also doesn’t take into consideration how grant application reviewers feel about it. AI companies sometimes tend to look at the world through rose colored lenses that don’t portray reality, in my humble opinion. Sending positive vibes your way. 🌟🌟💪🏾
I agree that ugly cover design should be a thing of the past. But how will AI overcome the copyright issue? As of now, they take what an artist already made and bundle it with other artist’s work. I can’t agree with using AI for cover design if that’s theft.
US LIBGONG maybjave to rethink its stance that AI-generated art gets no copyright protection. Suppose a prolific fiction author who is well published has 10 or 20 pages of notes for every page actually published, and teaches an offline AI said author's style, tone, language, and more. If the teaching/learning corpus is solely or 90+% of the author, then no copyright should be lost. And, authors who endlessly recycle themselves should NEVER be called a plagiarist or unoriginal just because some finger-wagging critic or industry is disappointed the creative didn't make some super-scaled cosmos-shaking breakthrough. LIBCONG may say it's heavily AI edited or not really sufficiently human transformed. But, how different is that compared to civil engineers using an app that knows wvery USA UCC and 80% of worldwide building codes? That's not all that different feom AI when there is real-time make-or-break feedback no human can perform at speed and at scale to modify roads and parking lots? Surely, they get copyright protection and control over their engineering drawings. What about home designers (degreed or not) who crank out triple-checked and certified as non-plagiarist works) floorplans they license for use by construction architects who supervise the build? Surely, copyright is there for them. What about naval architects who almost always abide air/wind wave/residual friction in all its forms and accordingly desigh ship hulls to be as fuel efficient as possible. They due to nature copy each other's successes, but modify the work to avoid internecine mutual nuclear annihilation and destructive and distractive litigation. They are more adult in lawsuit risk avoidance than most lawyers. And, these professional engineers get copyright protection for their clients. And, using TRIBON, Friendship, ASSET/LEAPS/CREATE, and use Rhino with Grasshopper, Orca, NEMO, and other plug-ins that permit blazingly fast and interactive quality work that used to take months or years to validate and often end up never built ships or rigs. Why is LIBCONG so dismissive? Probably lobbyists (all over the spectrum - IP, labor, curated art, investors, litigators, legislators) got them by the nape of the neck in a thorax-crushing apparatus?
You make a valid point that an author who trains a model on their own work loses no copyright in generating new works. That’s a blindspot I think a lot of people are missing, especially around a certain author who wants to do thousands of books with AI. Yes, you shouldn’t use Microsoft’s or Google’s generative AI tools to write your books because you may not have full protection, but there’s nothing stopping someone from their own homebrew generative AI model of their own (trained on their work) and going to town with it. I appreciate your perspective.
Very interesting video, thank you. I think that for authors, it will be important to create a unique ecosystem that includes more than the stories and allows readers to stay connected to the writer, creating community. And I agree with you; humans need human contact, and sooner rather than later, there will be burnout, and people will crave that authentic human interaction. Just recently, I received an email from a reader on my email list, I answered the email, and he answered back with random weird questions because he wanted to make sure he wasn't talking to a bot. People don't like talking to robots, and I am pretty sure they will not like reading stories written by robots.
Nice. 40 year programming veteran that recently moved from tech writing to fiction. I've had my head in the sand on AI. While listening to your presentation, I signed up for ChatGPT and played a bit. Currently I'm working as a Ruby and Rails developer for a legal software firm. We were recently told to NOT used AI for work. Apparently many were. That, in itself, shows its real. I think you are probably 80% on your predictions. (Where is Cobol headed?)
This is not so much a comment about this video. I have a question about past videos you have done. In one of them, you said that you would pay $100 -$400 for someone to proofread your work. I was wondering where you got somebody to proofread for those rates. From the quote I got from Reedsy, it is closer to $1000. I know you mentioned Upwork, but they charge by the hour, so I'm not sure if that is where you went to. Besides that, keep up the good work. It is great to have someone who went through the process helping us newcomers to the game. Thanks.
Hi Michael, thank you for this , AI seems to be hitting us with its magnitude from everywhere 😂😂😂. I heard on someone’s RU-vid ad this morning how Google is demoting sites that have AI generated material, (probably due to the incorrect information it generates which gets copy and pasted by the writer) what do you think?
I haven't heard about that, but it wouldn't surprise. It's still a challenge right now to determine AI-generated content, but there are some tell-tale signs. Sites that are churning out tons of content faster than they have in the past, for example.
In the age of generative AI, the role and creativity of writers will evolve, ushering in a dynamic collaboration between human intuition and machine intelligence. I have a video about AI and its my channel so go ahead and check that out
hi,'im a writer who is not a native speakers, i decided to stop learning english and focus on story as i'm pretty sure gpt can take care of the writing why i take care of story. what do you think about it?
At current, you still have to fact check ChatGPT and it does a lot of plagiarism if you're not careful. Maybe I'm not giving the right prompts, but some of what I ask for with descriptions or help with dialogue are way too hokey? Trite? Melodramatic, it's definitely lacking something. Soft peddles for too rosey at times.
I don't think Word's formatting capabilities will change any time soon. People will still probably use Vellum or Atticus for that. But for inspiration, writing, and editing? It'll be hard to argue against when you've got Copilot and other writing apps are the same as they've always been. Opinion of one.
I have the unique perspective of being a programmer and indie author and the future of art, in general, will change dramatically the world in positive and negative ways. In six months AI advanced as much as video games in the last thirty years. The competition will be brutal because everyone will be able to produce top-quality products for free (no proofreading needed, professional covers, translations to many languages, etc), so the market will be flooded. The only way to survive will be to develop custom models with unique aesthetics or literary style (Stephen King style, Rowling style, etc) or music (music is advancing relatively slowly compared to images and text, but trust me the music industry is gone) and sell it/rent it to people. In the literary world, the first to experience a Shyamalan plot twist and realize that they were dead from the start will be cover artists (they are half-dead now that MidjourneyV5 can do proper hands), proofreaders, and ghostwriters. But writers will have to adapt or die soon, with the addition of plug-ins to GPT-4 you can expect book templates with character sheets that you will send to get a coherent complete book out of thin air in minutes. Translators are screwed, I cannot see a way for them to adapt. However, 100% AI-accurate translations will take being generous perhaps 5-10 years.
Thanks for providing a space to talk about AI - I've been mulling many of the things you discussed especially the part about why Amazon is being hush hush. It almost seems like Threads vs. Twitter in that Twitter created such a commotion for what seemed like a long while and then all of the sudden we see Threads launch. Is there some super secret AI project Amazon is mulling? Time will tell. It will be exciting to watch. I do wish we were allowed to use AI generated covers for our artwork on Amazon - although maybe that's a thing now - things change so quickly! Much gratitude for the thought-provoking ideas!
You covered a lot of ground, Ron. I don't mind reading a handbook that is written by AI about how to assemble a closet or something like it. But I find it creepy that I as a human should get feelings when reading emotional stories written by AI, even if all words and phrases are there. If stories that supposed to create human emotions within humans are not written by a human, it feels FAKE, it doesn't matter how good it sounds. So your point that readers might not accept books entirely written by AI might be well taken.
I think AI will be a godsend for creatives. The best AI images are produced by humans who can write the best prompts. AI is an appalling story generator. After I got it to do some editing for me, I got it to generate just one more time to see what would happen. It started rewriting the chapter with a different ending. I would never have shamed myself by considering writing such terrible clichéd dross. The cliche produced by the new ending was really helpful in confirming the atmosphere of the chapter though. It entirely missed the undertone of humour, but got the mystery. The undertone of humour does exist in the writing, because I've had two editors independently recognise it without any prompting from me.
It won’t take long before ai will write perfect fiction. If you’re a writer, find a new job or cash in while not everyone is doing it yet. I am amazed by how pessimistic you are about artists (and should be) but then you try to create this overly optimistic silver lining for authors.
But the point is that AI isn't doing that now. I don't believe he's being overly optimistic. He's simply stating that RIGHT NOW, you can create an artistic "masterpiece" to rival great artists in minutes. But you cannot create a novel that rivals any of our great novels. Because writing a novel is deceptively intricate work. To get it right, requires more than the AI has been programmed to do. Will it get there? Of course, but it's not quite there now. In the meantime, writers can still write. More than that, eventually it will be AI+writer vs. AI+writer, meaning you still need the human behind the AI. AI on it's own isn't out there writing.
I understand your criticism, and it is a valid one. I could be wrong, and time will certainly tell. But I do know three things. 1. AI, even though it will be very good in the future, will likely never be “perfect.” It can get you 95% of the way to your goal, but the devil is in the missing 5%. 2. People are generally lazy and want things to be easy. It’s easy to generate a painting in the style of Monet and Rutkowski, and easy to fix imperfections of the output. An epic fantasy novel mashup of Game of Thrones and Harry Potter? Not so much. That will be a deterrent, and an opportunity. 3. Readers take HUMAN authors to the cleaners over little detail inconsistencies today. (Ie the 5%). Will they put up with an AI making these types of mistakes? Some will, but I think readers are different than consumers of art because while AI art can pass a quick visual test, readers will be spending a lot more time with novels and will have to live longer with the imperfections. Heaven help the fools who churn out novels without checking them. If anything, AI could make readers more skeptical and cynical. Readers will ultimately determine how this unfolds, but I still believe this is not the end of our profession.
