Let’s rock the neurotic writing world!Our Twitter handle is @TheIWSG and hashtag is #IWSG.
The awesome co-hosts for the October 4 posting of the IWSG are Natalie Aguirre, Kim Lajevardi, Debs Carey, Gwen Gardner, Patricia Josephine, and Rebecca Douglass!
October 4 question: The topic of AI writing has been heavily debated across the world. According to various sources, generative AI will assist writers, not replace them. What are your thoughts?
Here are my thoughts, unchanged since I wrote this several months ago: https://www.pjcolando.com/even-with-the-advent-of-ai-humorists-will-still-thrive/.
My feeling of insulation is predicated on the supposition that artificial intelligence can’t comprehend humor and sarcasm, which is what I write.
Now my angst joins with writers whose works were used without permission to teach ChatGPT how to write. Holy Copyright Infringement! The Authors Guild, a U.S. trade group for writers, filed a class action last week on behalf of 17 plaintiffs, including big literary names John Grisham, Jodi Picoult, Roxane Gay, Suzanne Collins, Doug Preston George R.R. Martin, and Jonathan Franzen. Lee Goldberg and Amy Stewart are pissed. Michael Connoly hasn’t yet weighed in publicly. The dastardly deed of stealing intellectual property has been perpetrated on SoCal writer pals, Matt Coyle and Amy Wallen.
I tried to tell them that it was a back-handed compliment. After all, Google didn’t feed any of my novels into their artificial writing machine…
The website where one can check is apparently embedded in an article in The Atlantic: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/09/books3-database-generative-ai-training-copyright-infringement/675363/?fbclid=IwAR0VbAzDVsu6wbYd4xnnGaEf_jbmDDwGjiWixcbeoobFW6_mwxaydMe2oDY
The Copyright Act of 1976, which provides the basic framework for the current copyright law in the United States, was enacted on October 19, 1976, This predates Google, yet the founders should be aware. Lawyers have been hired, a fortune will be spent, and I expect this case to go all the way to the Supremes. Battlelines have been drawn. Listen to Buffalo Springfield – an adored and accomplished group of musicians from the 60-70s – sing of another event, a serenade to accompany the current situation:
What do you think, my compadres insecure writers?
I agree that AI can’t replace humans. And there’s a danger it can use author’s works, which has to be stopped. But it does have its uses.
I must confess that I enjoy the benefits of Grammerly and have used Pro Writing Aid
Another blogger posted a list today of AI source materials and her blog was third on the list, without her consent or any compensation. It is happening big time and most don’t even know it.
Yup, it’s a dangerous trend!
The copyright infringement behind improvements in AI may be the most disturbing aspect of it. That they might steal my existing work (as if) to create a machine that could replace me in writing it is kind of beyond comprehension.
…perhaps not replace you and other human writers, but to undercut…
I expect the copyright infringement lawsuit will be in the courts for years before boundaries are set. I’m glad someone is taking this bull by the horns 😉
As I stated, I expect the Supremes (better moniker than SCOTUS- ha!) will be the chief deciders.
We definitely need more regulation around how AI gets trained. But it should be along similar lines to what is already available to the average user. Open-source content that is not gated should be free access and just as libraries pay a higher fee for purchasing copyrighted work than the average book sale, we should have a similar process for AI to gain access to such content. We also probably need higher regulatory settings around copyright and trademark infringement than current standards based on human comprehension
That being said, I am excited to explore how AI can be used ethically in my day jobs of marketing and project management.
200 – That’s around how many books are being used to train artificial intelligence systems, according to a recent report. Many authors are outraged (stated in my post) as some AI companies continue to allegedly copy the content of their novels without receiving permission or providing compensation. That’s teh rub –
AI is in its infancy, so no one has figured out how to protect themselves against people using this powerful tool to steal their intellectual/creative work. AI reminds me of cloning and splitting the atom and a lot of other scientific discoveries. Science and technology are always ahead of the curve. Then humanity scurries around playing catchup to control it.
But whatever happens next, we’re not going to put the genie back in the bottle. Never happens.
Good insight, Valerie