It takes no ability or creativity to get someone (something) else to do your work.

It has no business in writing stories.

Publishing: my current view is stratified text ['AI' and 'content' can mean many things so I prefer not to use the terms due to very different understandings] can be published and sold by a software company or an influencer or any individual under a different and new cataloguing system other than ISBNs and ISSNs, such as an expanded Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Copyright laws require urgent review to account for digitization and stratified text.

Rationale: It was once the fashion (and it has become fashionable again) to publish semi-fiction mashups that consist of excerpts of already published works compiled with critique and fiction narration. To be clear, these mashups are not anthologies or collected works but it a literal mashup of different published works with text added. Some will say what does it matter whether it was created through a typewriter, a Word processor, an AI or other tool, as long as the final product is enjoyed by the intended audience? The difference is that organic human folklore and cultural change and part of human evolution and humans connecting to other humans. Stratified text is human-authorized but should not be claimed to represent human culture.

[deleted]

I don’t really mind it so long as writers get the credit and get paid accordingly.

This is a negotiable with the Screenwriters Guild at the moment. They’re worried Studios may be able to slither their way out of paying screenwriters their dues for scripts whose foundations come from AI. A genuine concern.

Then we also have issues arises from artists vs AI generated book covers. No doubt once the tech becomes good enough (which isn’t that far off) publishing houses will take advantage and artist drawn book covers will become a novelty.

For books, my personal opinion is if a writer uses AI they should disclose it, but that’s just me.

If writers are using it to write then they aren't writers. They aren't doing any writing. They aren't doing any work.

If writers hate the struggle of writing then they are free to do something else with their life.

This isn't a solution.

That's just really sad. The reason AI exists in the first place and is able to 'write' at all is because of centuries of human endeavour and creativity. Creativity and the ability to bring something into the world that didn't exist before is a core part of being human and you're just so casual about throwing that away as though AI is better in some way. You also said in one of your comments that most writers struggle with writing, which is such a gross generalisation, I love writing and it can be hard sometimes but it's good to challenge ourselves. This type of post is terrifying because it makes me wonder if the general population feels the same way and if we'll lose the human element of our creative output.

Depends how much they use it. Some writers will use it as a sort of foundation or skeleton for a story and then write over it.

I don’t think it will, at least not in our lifetimes. AI will become better and used more, but artists need to create. The responsibility is on corporations to not rely and replace creatives with AI, which is what I don’t trust.

The future of literature is the future of every other entertainment medium: homogenized and controlled entirely by giant corporations that will flood the market with machine-generated content because paying a human to make it would cut into their profits. I give it twenty years at most before every industry is infected beyond a cure, and if you want human-generated content you'll have to look to the past and use physical media from the past.

Hi there! This sub is for discussion around published literature and industry news. Your post would be more suitable to a tech or AI related community which are dedicated to these sorts of topics. Thank you!