Romero said, "The writers in the workshop unanimously agreed that AI-powered writing won’t replace writers anytime soon."
But isn't it inevitable that AI will replace writers at some point? I don't claim to know when, but isn't it likely to happen sooner than we expect? So, writers all over the Net are very enthusiastically writing about tools that will, sooner or later, put them all out of business. Has it occurred to AI programmers yet that AI will put them out of business too? Intellectual elites??
It looks to me that there are major denial defense mechanisms at play here all across the intellectual world. As a follow on to Don't Look Up, the next movie should be Don't Look At The Code.
Very interesting. I’d just love a perfect one click copy editor and proofreader. Fix it all instantly and perfectly. That’s the dream. Sorry human editors.
I don't think human editors have to worry (yet). In the cases where writers need an editor, Wordcraft won't suffice (for instance, the editor may give feedback on tone and style, more than mistakes or typos--and Wordcraft simply can't do that). But, for those of us who don't have editors (I'm my own), I agree--a tool like this one can be super useful.
Why are we comforting ourselves with the often repeated phrase, "we don't have to worry, YET". Instead, why not just face where this is going, and discuss whether it is really somewhere we wish to go. Shouldn't that come first?
Many or most factory workers are now working at Walmart or serving coffee. Intellectual workers appear to be next up. Nobody knows exactly when or how, but isn't it pretty clear that is where we're headed? Is that where we want to go?
Also, as a novelist and someone who converses often with other novelists, I could really see this benefiting the plotters-- the people like James Patterson who totally plot out their books in advance. If the AI could take a plot summary and write it in your voice you’d really be able to scale up novel production. Many authors would LOVE to churn out a quality book every month...
I see this being possible soon. If you finetune GPT-3 with one single author, the output is often quite reasonable.
However, these tools are still super unreliable in general. If you used Wordcraft to write an entire novel, you'd have to edit it thoroughly--and given that you'd be just another reader in that case, it'd be probably more work than just writing it from scratch (in the end, as you know much better than I do, a novel can be very complex structurally and these tools are horrible with long-term coherence and keeping a narrative voice).
The problem of unreliability requires language models to be trained differently, with a different objective (not just getting the most likely next word given some context) and not as generalist models, but specific ones--and even with that, may not be enough (I'm confident Google is already doing something like this, so we'll see!)
Agreed. Honestly, I wish Pro Writing Aid would just add a “correct all” button cause it would be 75% correct and that’s still way faster that changing everything one by one.
I hear you, a new book every month sounds great, but doesn't scaling up novel production sooner or later lead to author replacement? If AI could generate a convincing novel from a human written plot summary, how long until AI can write the plot summary too?
And let us remember, when the factory workers got automated out of the factory, they didn't then receive a share of the new profits generated for factory owners. Those on top won, those on the bottom lost.
The most successful authors financially are those that scale themselves into becoming a company/franchise themselves, like James Patterson. But people still love variety, so there is plenty of room for many authors, even if they do become franchises.
Also room for very personal books, like maybe a real human author writes a book only for you.
Sorry human editors. And sorry human writers too. Editors and writers wish to get paid. AI will do the same job much cheaper. Editors and writers lose. Welcome to Walmart, how may we help you today?
Shouldn't we be talking about when this will happen, not if it will happen?
Yes. The book “Content” published by MIT press goes into great detail on how magazines like Forbes already rely on AI to create exponentially more posts with fewer staff writers. It’s already happening.
Thank you Charlotte, I didn't know that about Forbes. That's a good example.
I'm wondering if the editors at Forbes have figured out yet that the same processes they are using to replace writers can also be used to replace them. Do intellectual elites as a group understand that they, like factory workers, are replaceable? If yes, where are they writing about this? Any tips or links appreciated.
Romero said, "The writers in the workshop unanimously agreed that AI-powered writing won’t replace writers anytime soon."
But isn't it inevitable that AI will replace writers at some point? I don't claim to know when, but isn't it likely to happen sooner than we expect? So, writers all over the Net are very enthusiastically writing about tools that will, sooner or later, put them all out of business. Has it occurred to AI programmers yet that AI will put them out of business too? Intellectual elites??
It looks to me that there are major denial defense mechanisms at play here all across the intellectual world. As a follow on to Don't Look Up, the next movie should be Don't Look At The Code.
Phil, I think one of my other articles answers to some of your questions. I don't see if you read that one, so here's the link: https://thealgorithmicbridge.substack.com/p/everyone-is-wrong-about-ai-writing
Please, let me know what you think of my arguments there.
"Here's an interesting writing tool -- but you can't use it."
Gee thanks, Google. NOT.
I know right..
Very interesting. I’d just love a perfect one click copy editor and proofreader. Fix it all instantly and perfectly. That’s the dream. Sorry human editors.
I don't think human editors have to worry (yet). In the cases where writers need an editor, Wordcraft won't suffice (for instance, the editor may give feedback on tone and style, more than mistakes or typos--and Wordcraft simply can't do that). But, for those of us who don't have editors (I'm my own), I agree--a tool like this one can be super useful.
Why are we comforting ourselves with the often repeated phrase, "we don't have to worry, YET". Instead, why not just face where this is going, and discuss whether it is really somewhere we wish to go. Shouldn't that come first?
Many or most factory workers are now working at Walmart or serving coffee. Intellectual workers appear to be next up. Nobody knows exactly when or how, but isn't it pretty clear that is where we're headed? Is that where we want to go?
Also, as a novelist and someone who converses often with other novelists, I could really see this benefiting the plotters-- the people like James Patterson who totally plot out their books in advance. If the AI could take a plot summary and write it in your voice you’d really be able to scale up novel production. Many authors would LOVE to churn out a quality book every month...
I see this being possible soon. If you finetune GPT-3 with one single author, the output is often quite reasonable.
However, these tools are still super unreliable in general. If you used Wordcraft to write an entire novel, you'd have to edit it thoroughly--and given that you'd be just another reader in that case, it'd be probably more work than just writing it from scratch (in the end, as you know much better than I do, a novel can be very complex structurally and these tools are horrible with long-term coherence and keeping a narrative voice).
The problem of unreliability requires language models to be trained differently, with a different objective (not just getting the most likely next word given some context) and not as generalist models, but specific ones--and even with that, may not be enough (I'm confident Google is already doing something like this, so we'll see!)
Agreed. Honestly, I wish Pro Writing Aid would just add a “correct all” button cause it would be 75% correct and that’s still way faster that changing everything one by one.
I hear you, a new book every month sounds great, but doesn't scaling up novel production sooner or later lead to author replacement? If AI could generate a convincing novel from a human written plot summary, how long until AI can write the plot summary too?
And let us remember, when the factory workers got automated out of the factory, they didn't then receive a share of the new profits generated for factory owners. Those on top won, those on the bottom lost.
The most successful authors financially are those that scale themselves into becoming a company/franchise themselves, like James Patterson. But people still love variety, so there is plenty of room for many authors, even if they do become franchises.
Also room for very personal books, like maybe a real human author writes a book only for you.
Human-written books could become rare like handmaid jewelry or handmade couture clothes.
Sorry human editors. And sorry human writers too. Editors and writers wish to get paid. AI will do the same job much cheaper. Editors and writers lose. Welcome to Walmart, how may we help you today?
Shouldn't we be talking about when this will happen, not if it will happen?
Yes. The book “Content” published by MIT press goes into great detail on how magazines like Forbes already rely on AI to create exponentially more posts with fewer staff writers. It’s already happening.
Thank you Charlotte, I didn't know that about Forbes. That's a good example.
I'm wondering if the editors at Forbes have figured out yet that the same processes they are using to replace writers can also be used to replace them. Do intellectual elites as a group understand that they, like factory workers, are replaceable? If yes, where are they writing about this? Any tips or links appreciated.
The only person I hear talking a lot about this is Andrew Yang, but I’m not super looped in. I’m sure others are writing about it.