They're not that bad, go easy on the staff!
If they were revolting, why hire them in the first place?
Sounds like HR wasn't doing their jobs
This is dumb. i am not anti llm but i realize i am anti generation. asking an llm to help you solve a problem with your ac to save you money - ok. using it to replace art or (not a cae in this story) write a book, just fucked up.
we want to write books. llms shoild replace the publishers so people can write books and get thrm published without a publisher fleecing them.
I'm ok if they use ai for supplemental proof reading and finding typos and mistakes, not if they write or edit the books with them. As for AI art, may be I'm not the target audience, but I am not a fan of the overtly visual book covers, ai or human made.
I've suspected some cover art I've seen for books has been AI (but I can't always reliably tell). Kind of gross that some of it probably is.
Sadly, as much as I see people against gen AI online, people in real life aren't (at least where I'm at). They're gobbling up the slop.
I don't even want to imagine what things will look like in twenty years, when the kids who grew up with this thinks this is the new normal.
Going forward, either you embrace gen AI, or you stick to media produced roughly before 2022 (or before 2019 to virtually avoid it totally). For writing, I'm not sure how the future will look for those who care. At least you can go see live performances of music, for instance, or even watch someone paint something.
For now, maybe writers will ban together and create trusted groups of human made stuff. If we're lucky, maybe AI slop for the most part will be contained to corporations. Indie publishers could become the place for human made stuff. Assuming the corporations don't find a way to drown out the indie publishers. But even if indie publishers take off in this direction, for how long will the people actually interested in art/writing free of gen AI care?
The problem is the gap closing. Only a few years ago, even last year, AI creations were still obvious. There's still tells, but they grow more and more subtle, and some indicators used by AI filtering are how some people write and draw. Where do you think the training for it came from? I see claims of AI and bots a lot as reactionary and then it's shown they were people. "AI slop" is even used as a slur and dismissal rather than an actual complaint of non-human source.
I don't have an answer. It's a huge problem, it should never have been let get this far legally and technically, and the gate is open now and it's not going away, even when the bubble breaks. And I find it very hypocritical that publishers have dropped to this level when for years the industry has been screaming against AI. Yet they're using it.
Modern cover art was total trash before Gen AI took off. Now it's just more recycled trash.
As a disabled author, I write my own prose but use LLMs for editing and cover art. I am forced into using AI for these tasks as the human equivalent charges more than I'm even allowed to have in a month. It was simple math, $20/mo for AI usage vs ~$2000+ for an editor and then around another ~$2000+ for an artist. So budget constraints forced my hand, and I will use any cheap resource I can find. In the US, if you're on disability you have a $2000/month hard limit with a combined cash+assets. So why should I give up a passion for financial gatekeeping?
A community for all things related to Books.
Community icon by IconsBox (from freepik.com)