• MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I guess I realise now that the value of something is not what people believe it to be. It is the length of suffering and effort the creator went through.

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    19 hours ago

    What bothers me about this is that the author fraudulently presented the book as her own work. Doesn’t matter to me if she used AI or hired a ghost writer - claiming you wrote something you didn’t write is fraud IMO. I’ve never understood how ghost writers are legal.

  • barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    22 hours ago

    It’s bad enough that they are using AI to create their content, but don’t they even proof-read it before uploading it? It seems like the most basic requirement, but they don’t even seem to be bothering with that.

  • karlhungus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Hate this title, how about:

    “A novel by author Lena McDonald, accidentally leaves AI prompt in published version.”

    • FizzyOrange@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      29
      ·
      1 day ago

      I don’t know if it’s necessary a bad thing. Presumably these people were enjoying the book until they read this. It’s kind of like the invention of the printing press. Sure, the content may not be artistically crafted any more, and there may be waaaay more slop. But I bet we will end up getting way more high quality content too.

      • WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I don’t know if it’s necessary a bad thing. Presumably these people were enjoying the book until they read this.

        How can we presume that?

        All we know is that these people were promised a novel written as art by humans and were baited and switched into getting an algorithm.

        It’s kind of like the invention of the printing press. Sure, the content may not be artistically crafted any more, and there may be waaaay more slop. But I bet we will end up getting way more high quality content too.

        If we’re still in the betting process for whether AI might one day potentially be high quality then it sounds like you understand that today it’s not a viable product to write novels with.

      • kamen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        I disagree.

        While AI might help at systemising and/or summarising already existing information, I wouldn’t rely on it at all for any creative thought. And what’s worse, the more people spare content like this, the more tolerant they’ll become to it, bringing the overall quality down.

  • 6nk06@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    The vibe coders and every person using an LLM can’t complain about it. It’s fair game.

    • Photuris@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 day ago

      Well, you certainly can complain about it and still use it, when your livelihood requires you to either use the tech, or get left behind by those who do. Speed and turnaround time wins over skill and quality.

      • MadhuGururajan@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        that is not true. Speed and turnaround NEVER wins over skill and quality. You need skill to produce stuff fast that is also of value.

        • wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          29 minutes ago

          Almost. A sudden shift from skill and quality to speed and turnaround wins out in the short run, just long enough to make number go up, cash the checks, and take the golden parachute out while leaving your underlings and consumers holding the bag.

    • Machinist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 day ago

      My son and I laughed our asses off over that presentation. Brilliant but kind of disgusting.

    • They don’t mention enshittification - I think Doctorow popularized the term later - but this is a perfect example of a process that contributes to the phenomenon.

      I had never thought about it in these terms, but they repeatedly mentioned curation, and it’s so clearly a fundamental topic in today’s online world.

      This was an incredible video, thanks for sharing. It gave me a new perspective to consider.

  • 3rr4tt1c@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 day ago

    AI can be ethically used in writing. This is not an example of that. People need to get into the “AI as a tool” mindset. And capitalism causing greed is part of the issue of course.

    • CHOPSTEEQ@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Writing is a rare form of communication, borderline unique to humans. Because of that, to me, it’s fundamentally unethical to have “AI” “write” anything. It’s insulting to me on a base level, particularly when used for communication.

    • tiddy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      We could also use a model or 2 trained on ethical data.

      Until then its pretty easy to argue all ai is unethical.