Readers Annoyed When Fantasy Novel Accidentally Leaves AI Prompt in Published Version, Showing Request to Copy Another Writer's Style (futurism.com)
from recursive_recursion@lemmy.ca to programming@programming.dev on 24 May 06:30
https://lemmy.ca/post/44662827

cross-posted from: lemmy.world/post/30154944

#programming

threaded - newest

recursive_recursion@lemmy.ca on 24 May 06:34 next collapse

Leave your guess for how long we’ve got till AI apps are spammed everywhere.

Also for no reason in particular:

sxan@midwest.social on 24 May 12:19 next collapse

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.

Machinist@lemmy.world on 24 May 20:11 collapse

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

kamen@lemmy.world on 24 May 07:06 next collapse

The future is now, right?

FizzyOrange@programming.dev on 24 May 17:17 collapse

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.

kamen@lemmy.world on 24 May 19:41 next collapse

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.

WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml on 25 May 11:26 next collapse

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.

Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml on 26 May 05:19 next collapse

It is absolutely nothing like the invention of the printing press

wise_pancake@lemmy.ca on 26 May 22:29 collapse

It helps you get up to the baseline but will never make you great.

6nk06@sh.itjust.works on 24 May 13:14 next collapse

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

Photuris@lemmy.ml on 24 May 14:49 collapse

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 on 25 May 19:08 collapse

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 on 25 May 20:35 collapse

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.

MadhuGururajan@programming.dev on 26 May 05:08 collapse

Ah ok you’re comment was descriptive… while mine was idealistic.

karlhungus@lemmy.ca on 24 May 13:36 next collapse

Hate this title, how about:

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

Artyom@lemm.ee on 24 May 23:58 collapse

Or, more accurately, ‘a novel that is at most partially by Lena McDonald’.

karlhungus@lemmy.ca on 25 May 00:24 next collapse

lol, way better!

Kissaki@programming.dev on 25 May 16:52 collapse

Or “a novel published as authored by Lena McDonald contains AI prompt”

Phoenix3875@lemmy.world on 26 May 06:07 collapse

“allegedly written”

drdiddlybadger@pawb.social on 24 May 15:53 next collapse

🔥👄🔥 There should be severe consequences for this.

explodicle@sh.itjust.works on 25 May 07:34 collapse

It would suck for the author, Lena McDonald, if anyone who searched for

“Lena McDonald author”

found out about this story.

WhatsTheHoldup@lemmy.ml on 25 May 11:23 collapse

I get what you’re doing but they can just change pennames

Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml on 26 May 05:18 collapse

They can, but that would at best be a hard reset on their reputation as an author, and unlikely to work long-term

Test_Tickles@lemmy.world on 31 May 10:20 collapse

I think you are grossly overestimating the audience of this author. They are a “self published” author whose books are free and not read by many people.
If anything, she will see a massive spike in readers just because of curious people checking her out.

3rr4tt1c@programming.dev on 24 May 16:45 next collapse

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 on 24 May 22:07 next collapse

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.

shalafi@lemmy.world on 25 May 21:18 next collapse

AI can be a fine tool to get writing inspiration, as with programming. It’s not fine as used in this article’s example.

daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 26 May 06:44 collapse

Sad disabled person who use AI tools to help communicate noises.

tiddy@sh.itjust.works on 25 May 00:20 collapse

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

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

explodicle@sh.itjust.works on 25 May 07:41 collapse

Would citing all the training sources satisfy the spirit of attribution licenses like CC-BY?

barneypiccolo@lemm.ee on 24 May 22:37 next collapse

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.

Brickhead92@lemmy.world on 25 May 21:09 next collapse

If only someone had created a proofreading AI.

Prompt: proofread the draft of my novel at a 6th grade reading level.

glitchdx@lemmy.world on 25 May 22:22 collapse

real authors have editors. If you replace the author with an ai, you still need an editor. There is no version of the current style of ai that can replace an editor.

LovableSidekick@lemmy.world on 25 May 02:18 next collapse

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.

Kolanaki@pawb.social on 25 May 02:19 next collapse

or hired a ghost writer

Isn’t that the entire point of hiring a ghost writer?

LovableSidekick@lemmy.world on 25 May 02:23 collapse

Isn’t what the entire point?

gwilikers@lemmy.ml on 25 May 19:30 collapse

Their goddamn ghosts maaaaaihn

buckethat wearing, three quarter lengths with red tinted sumglesses, 1990s conspiracy theorist voice

ikidd@lemmy.world on 25 May 19:58 collapse

Art of the Deal.

wolframhydroxide@sh.itjust.works on 25 May 20:31 next collapse

🦭💨

LovableSidekick@lemmy.world on 25 May 22:02 collapse

Tony Schwartz, ghost-writer of The Art of the Deal, who spent hundreds of hours with Trump, has called him, “the worst human being we’ve seen in a long while: no values, no beliefs, not a single charming redeeming quality.”

MadhuGururajan@programming.dev on 25 May 19:05 next collapse

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.

Sturgist@lemmy.ca on 26 May 05:46 next collapse

Something something something

🌍👨‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

lennivelkant@discuss.tchncs.de on 26 May 07:35 collapse

I think that’s where the world of art appreciation is now quite visibly breaking along a divide that has existed for a while. Some have always just valued the product: means be damned, if the end is enjoyable enough. For others, the process matters; for some even more than the result.

The latter group seems larger, though they may just be more passionate about their views and accordingly vocal (personally, I suspect both are the case, but I don’t know of any solid evidence).

Such is the way of new technology: it challenges traditional values. That doesn’t mean those values are without merit or have to be overturned, but I think it’s valuable that they’re challenged at least.

Here’s to hoping they stand the test.

daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com on 26 May 06:49 collapse

Author response:

Lena juggles lesson plans, bedtime stories, and plot twists—sometimes all in the same day. A teacher by day, a writer by night, and a mom 24/7, she crafts paranormal romances with magic, mystery, and just the right amount of chaos. When she’s not wrangling students or characters, she’s probably drinking coffee and pretending it’s a potion for extra energy.

Hi everyone,

I want to openly and sincerely address something that’s come to light regarding my book. A prompt was recently found in the text. It’s something that should never have made it into the final version. I want to apologize deeply to my readers and to the writing community.

The truth is, I used AI to help edit and shape parts of the book. As a full-time teacher and mom, I simply can’t afford a professional editor, and I turned to AI as a tool to help refine my writing. Teaching wages make it hard enough to support a family, and writing has been a passion project I pursued in the small pockets of time I could find. My goal was always to entertain, not to mislead.

That said, the appearance of an editing prompt in the final book was a mistake — one that I take full responsibility for. It has unintentionally sparked a broader conversation about AI in creative work, and I understand the concerns. I’m taking this seriously and will be reviewing the book carefully, making corrections where needed, and being more transparent in the future about my process.

To my readers: thank you for your support, your honesty, and your patience. I’m learning from this and will do better. To the wider community: I’m sorry.

Big “I’m a mom everything I do is excused because my motherhood” vibes.

All her books seems to be free on digital format and just about $3 on printed paper, and doesn’t seem like even for free, a lot of people read it. So it’s not like a big scam or something, I doubt she really makes any money with this.