I think ai published books are inevitable. They should be labled prominently as such and have a copyright category exclusive to ai that prevents overrlap into copyright for humans. The bookcovers should prominately state on the front it's ai generated and the authors works used in the programming for the story. Written permission from the authors should be mandatory and fair compensation should be compulsory and legally enforced. 9:58
@@tata11kai22 Because the concern for me isn't about screwing anyone over, it's about the art form itself. I'm concerned about "works" that aren't generated by human minds muddling our ability to connect with and better understand each other through art. If there's ever AI-generated artworks in a gallery or museum, that would be different and I would be just a furious about that as AI generated stories at the publishing houses. I'm concerned about preserving humanity is expression, but outside of that, AI is just a tool people will adapt to using in their jobs. Since a cover is just a marketing tool, and a representation of separate, original artwork (the book) covers are not an original expression and so using AI for them is fine
There are a lot of ways to use AI that go beyond "write the story for me!" For example, Google recently released notebookLM. It allows you to upload your story and ask questions about your own story like "What are the themes?" or "What is the motivation of character X." The responses have surprised me as very insightful and let me further develop my story. Another example is Dalle-3. I've asked it to draw my characters, settings, and scenes based on my descriptions. While it's not what I had imagined in my head, seeing it furthered my fantasy. I've given a paragraph of mine to ChatGPT and told it to make it better or change the tone. While I didn't take the result, seeing what it thought needed changing and some of its changes gave me ideas on what I wanted to do with the paragraph. AI has been really good for research. It quickly let's me research real places, cultures, dialects, and so on. It hallucinates quite a bit. Sometimes that can be useful for a fantasy story. Other times, you have to fact check it.
@@Exayevie I don’t generally mind covers that aren’t as artistic as others either, but in that case it is a copyright concern if nothing else, and a concern of artists being shafted in favor of cheap AI. Never mind being a tool, I don’t think publishers would hire artists at all if they could just have someone in the marketing department generate an image of a sword for a fantasy book or something, and the likelihood that said image is very close to an existing piece is non zero
Good video, I Have a couple of Ideas for future videos. "Can non-US citizens hire a literary agent to publish a book the traditional way" and "What would be the best time of the year to send your query letter? ".
I already had a bunch of agents asking in their queries if you used AI for your work. I made it very clear that everything they will read, is done by humans, from editor to betas. I still hope to get an agent next year. Now that one gave me a personal feedback which may increase my chance.
The copyright issue is the big determiner of whether publishing houses accept AI. They won't publish if they can't copyright it, regardless of all other considerations. If copyrighting AI generated content becomes possible, then we will probably see small publishing houses spring up that pump out cheap genre books for non-discriminating readers. Given that the big publishing houses don't have a shortage of manuscripts, I'm not sure they have much motivation to switch to AI because they need to differentiate from the startup AI publishers. The big 5 that don't go out of business will market specifically to the audience who appreciate art and don't want to read AI generated books.
I can see the big publishers using AI to generate more books from their famous writers who have died. So new authors not only have to complete with other writers but also the dead ones 😢
The role of AI in the publishing process is more neuanced then it may initially seem. Consider the tools available today - for instance, Quillbot and Grammarly are now very much AI. These are AI-powered and widely used for enhancing writing. Should their use be restricted or censored? I don’t believe so. Additionally, chatbots can be invaluable for research, a fact I can attest to from personal experience in writing my novel - I checked out the facts using them. A google search is also AI powered. The key point is that the creative core of any work - the plot, characters, scenes, and unique voice - should always originate from the author. AI tools should be seen as aides that enhance and refine the author's vision, not replace the creativity. I suspect most agree with this - but if an agent asked me to say did I use AI should I say no?
Agreed. Google is absolutely AI. Should authors who use search engines be flagged? What about writers in 1980 using a word processor? Or in 2020, watching Alyssa's videos on RUclips? Computer algorithms brought me here, not humans. Some people are quick to adapt or handle change and those are the agents I'd want to work with.
Well research is of course irrelevant. It’s not considered a copyright infringement to ask a historian for facts then include those facts. Editing tools are probably a gray area. Things like Grammarly suggesting better phrases are no more problematic than the old word processor grammar checks imo, but I do wonder how they’d fit into AI copyright law. I think that specifically generating long sections or full works should definitely be “restricted” in the sense that they can’t be granted copyright, and I doubt publishers would knowingly buy something that’s AI generated (if it’s even good enough to get published). It’s not the writer’s work if they didn’t write it.
@@joevaldez6457the difference is that when you search something on google you don’t tend to copy and paste the result directly into the text of your work and then publish it as your own. And for auto corrected grammar that would hardly make up a significant portion, and the ideas themselves would be original. Watching a youtube video is not the same as actually generating text and selling it as your own. That doesn’t seem confusing to me, and there’s no rule, legal or unspoken, that requires authors to write with no advice or research. Search algorithms then have nothing to do with it.
It's funny that you should mention that ads aren't working as well as some authors might have hoped in getting their books into readers' hands. Several years ago, I had to suppress the urge to roll my eyes every time a particular author's TV commercials popped up. James Patterson put out a lot of TV ads for several months for a few of his books. I don't know if it worked very well, but if I had to guess, I'd say not. The commercials stopped, and they never returned. As for me, it's on my bucket list for me to make the rounds of talk shows/podcasts to talk about my books. I'd love to appear on The View. 🙂
Great video. Thank you for the information about finishing your manuscript. I’m about a third of the way through my book and was wondering how polished it needed to be before I sent it literary agents.
The last prediction certainly interests me, for several reasons. I do believe that in the last two years (at least post-pandemic), reading or books as a product, has switched from something mostly private/individual to something you share with a group, often a group of like-minded people (lovers of a certain genre, author, series, ...). One of the major drivers for this I fear, is a growing epidemic of loneliness with people in their 20ies and 30ies. Finding your 'tribe' (in this case through books) is of tremendous value, even if the contact with others is just online. It creates a sense of belonging that many seek today. Translating this to marketing strategy, especially when it comes to the classic bookshop, a library, ... ; I think those places that identify themselves as a place where you can meet 'members of your tribe', are the ones that will come out on top. It will not just be a game of selling books anymore, but it will be a challenge of becoming a place where you can meet likeminded peers, which is something online sales/market places will be in a disadvantage.
I very much agree with your 2024 predictions. I believe that AI is rooted in our every day lives. How will agents, the copyright office or publishing houses know if AI is actually used in one’s creation or used to enhance said? Human creativity is magnificent in its own right. AI can breach as it stands. What can one do to defend potential AI breaches?
Hi Alyssa! Love your videos. I'm currently in the process of trying out different ways to shape my query letter, but keep getting sent back to the drawing board by the kind folks over on r/Pubtips. I think my main problem is my MS is an ensemble story, whereas people advise you to stick to a single mc in your letter. This is making it hard to shape the letter in a compelling way. Ultimately, the story is about the shared experience and growth of three characters, not one. Should I stick to one mc in the query and keep throwing it at the wall untill it sticks, or should I try out a version where I have the three characters share the spotlight? I also worry if any agent were to read my manuscript, they might be dissapointed at the multiple pov's after having been promised a single mc.
Well, I don't like all your predictions, but I agree with them. I will say that authors are finding new ways to connect with readers should be met with excitement. Personally, I've just opened a youtube channel (Frenchie Frier's Story Land should you be curious) for my short stories with the intent of putting out a new story ever other week. I expect to spend the next couple of years figuring out how to do this right and odds are it won't work, but writing is not about playing the probabilities, and it's exciting to be able to do this sort of thing.
I consider what I use as "AI assisted editing", with ProWriting Aid's AI tools. I don't believe that's a bad thing, though. A human intelligence helps you edit, and that's not against the rules. But if it writes/rewrite entire sections, then that seems shady. However, humans get away with ghost writers, so... there's that. I kinda like the AI chapter assessments. It tells me if the "feel" I'm going for is captured (in a generic sense). Also, what could be missing that might cause problems for the reader. It's not always right, but usually it gives a couple really useful bullet points. I rarely use the AI suggested sentence changes, although I do like them. I will sometimes select them, but always alter them manually. The AI doesn't understand an author's voice. It really just wants to alter the grammar in a more readable (possibly "appealing") way. I do see value in the AI suggestions, but I find that they rarely ever flow correctly with the rest of the chapter, like the suggestion you'd see from a human editor. All-in-all, I'm quite impressed with AI assisted editing. I set the bar low (i.e. as buggy new technology) and it exceeded several of my expectations.
I’m very disappointed. I get spammed by the email I signed up for to receive the story assessment sheet but I never got that sheet. This is not reflective of your neat and trusted way of content creation. Please do something to solve this issue. My email starts with tu and ends with 2010. Thanks
I use ChatGPT to help me structure my outlines. I give it the information needed and just use it to help me organize it. But not for actual writing. (I also use it as a thesaurus) Would uses like this need to be disclosed when asked if I used AI?
You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. AI is here to stay whether we like it or not. The question is not, "Should AI be allowed?" The question is, "How are we planning to deal with AI in the writing industry?" The quicker we learn to accept it and use it as just another tool, the quicker we stop sounding like luddites bemoaning the changes from quills, to fountain pens, to ballpoint pens, to typewriters, to word processors, to computers. Embrace change and grow, or stagnate and die where you are. I'm using the general "you" here and not directly pointing this at anyone in particular, especially not the creator of this video, whom I adore!
My biggest questions really fall into the area of AI. Where is the demarcation of acceptable use of AI versus AI created? As a knowledge tool, most AI can provide sufficient superficial details that quickly fill a need that works akin to a quote dictionary or similar reference guide that others might've used in the past. For example, you might have a point in a scene where you're about to transition the story, and you decide to put the transition moment into the voice of the character. So you decide to quote Alice in Wonderland. What's the difference in using AI, Google, or a physical quote dictionary to go get the exact quote about seeing how far the rabbit hole goes to show your character understanding the story of about to transition and raising the stakes? What about using it as a copyeditor to help with something like dialogue. You want this particular character in your story to sound a certain way, or you've based them on a specific actor, and due to the complexity of your scene, in your revision process, you've rewritten the dialogue a dozen or so times and can't quite capture the tone you're looking for. You throw that one line into AI with the needed context, and it produced a pretty accurate output that was closer to what you're looking for. How's that different that hiring a copy editor who might come up with, more or less, the exact same output? Lastly, what about in the outlining process as a note taker and brainstorming tool? I personally use the snowflake method. I've considered using AI to help me build that first outline by going through the steps, having it track my notes, and producing an output of my notes and thoughts through the process. Here's an example. I'm beginning to outline my next project, and had a character that I was about to develop. Because of my main character being a female, I was on the fence about having the primary supporting character be a male, so I just asked GPT it's opinion, and it voiced my exact same concerns I was having, this could create an audience expectation of a romantic relationship, as well as some other cons I hadn't considered, with all the pros being superficial, that role is typically a make dominated role, which further enhanced my concerns of creating the character as a male. What it did do was also give me the pros and cons of using a female and gender fluid character. I hadn't thought to considered gender fluid. But the minute it was suggested, I saw an immense opportunity for conflict and character development that also succinctly tied to themes I've already established for the main character to explore through the story. Since I asked the Chatbot a question in the super early development stages, before I even had a character design in place, when I go query this story in a year, will I need to check that I used AI at one point? Will this exclude me from traditional publishing as nearly all zines and contests explicitly state that AI is to not be used at any stage? I think there is a vast difference between "Rewrite the boy who cried Wolf as a 100,000 word dark fantasy novel blending the styles of Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, Alfred Hitchcock, and HP Lovecraft," and publishing that, versus, "I need help with this one line of dialogue. Here's the context and what I'm trying to convey. How might I rewrite this to achieve the intended goal in the most concise way possible." I'd love to hear feedback on these questions.
It's a very challenging querying landscape out there and I've been slogging for months. I've been agented before (twice), with my last agent leaving the profession a year ago. I've had a rough time out in the query trenches, even with two previously published books with a big indie. I'm noticing generally more and more it's a lot less about the quality of the writing and more about the story concept and broadest marketability that's getting picked up. I'm not sure what this means for authors, but I think it's getting more polarised out there - you either need to be a big splashy debut or go indie/self pub. There's less risk being taken in favour of a 'sure thing' except there's no real sure thing in publishing. Also I'm finding the push for underrepresented voices in some ways is not materialising despite a lot of push a few years ago, or editors/agents asking. There are some new authors from underrepresented authors, but definitely not represented like I'd like to see.
While I agree that AI should not displace human authors, I don't think anything can completely stop it from being used. It's like Kodak resisting digital cameras or movie theaters resisting streaming. You can only swim against the avalanche so long before it consumes you, while those who swim with the avalanche have a better chance of coming out on top. For better or for worse, AI is here to stay. I don't like it, but it's the world we live in.
Why is it everyone who makes videos about writing waffle on for several minutes before getting to the point. You'd think being writers they would cut out the word waffle.
I agree that humans should write their own books using their own ideas and imaginations. To me, it feels like cheating using AI. I know it's becoming the norm, but call me old fashioned, thats ok. Im in my sixties anyway, so yes, I am old fashioned. 😅 But I prefer sticking to my own imagination to write my books. No AI usage for me thanks very much. 😅
When technology changes the way we live, expect it to influence everything, including publishing. You don’t want to find yourself in a position where you are being left behind or running to catch up. Stay alert, be aware, and thoroughly educated on the benefits and disadvantages of AI.
To me, there's a difference between "Hey ai, write me a compelling romance novel" and have it generate a 300 page book and "Hey ai, I wrote this story. Can you fix punctuation and grammar errors for me ". If you do it the first way, then you are no author and there should be ways to limit and detect that filth. But if you use ai the other way, then in my opinion you're just saving yourself 100s of dollars by not having to pay someone to edit your work. AI isn't all bad but people will take advantage of like they do with anything that could potentially make money. Personally I like the idea of free editing i just hope that means to detect fake work evolves as better ai is invented.
I agree. I am seeing people on various forums/chat groups using AI for everything. Plots, chapters, tweaking each paragraph… the results are very interesting and do make for a good read. However how is a person going to learn their craft if they rely on AI to write every aspect of their book? The kicker is they’ll make more money because of it. I can now more fully understand the reasoning behind the writers strike. I’m struggling as an author and so frustrated by AI.
@@cecelively5515 AI isn't advanced enough yet to be a reliable tool for basic research, let alone sound writing feedback on anything that requires actual discernment. The current crop of AI regurgitates, it does not have actual taste.The people jumping onto AI as it is and using it as a crutch for everything are greatly risking their work in doing so.
The idea of people writing books with AI makes me nauseous. It's not paying homage or giving nods to famous writers, it stealing. Famous writers are suing and hackers are trying to corrupt the system. People compare it to file-sharing like Napster. This isn't sharing a song.
Hey Alyssa. I have been using AI to generate and elaborate on backstory, to speed up production time. Nothing verbatim from the AI gets into a manuscript, but I can put less time into creating a life timeline for characters and that helps me write with more speed and confidence. As for this being a hard time to be querying for a book; you got that right!
If they allow AI without full disclosure, I’ll have to stop buying new releases. There are plenty of books published before AI was a thing, and I wouldn’t want to accidentally consume filthy AI-produced text.
As an author who has to spend months of her salary just to get one round of edits done, I do hope AI could help in editing. Writing with AI is a big NO for me. But it would help if AI could do some editing work. That is, only with a finished manuscript.
Those opposing AI in books have never USED AI in books. It is great for workshopping ideas, revising prose in paragraphs and chapters and doing developmental edits.
I am not interested in ideas that people didn't come up with, period. Books are for transmitting ideas from one mind to another. That means they have to start in a mind. Anything that merely entertains without connecting real people to real people is not worth the paper its printed on.
Agreed. A coding friend gave me a demo of ChatGPT 4.0 and I'm sold on it. AI is a writing assistant, not a writer. It can speed up the 1st draft process considerably, a game changer for those of us with day jobs. AI can do things like describe a train station in Cairo in 1939 in the style of whatever writer it is prompted to. It will not produce final draft quality work. The writer is necessary.
So, literally what is the value added from the trad pub houses?😂😂 They won't take it unless its polished up You have to do a substantial bit of marketing yourself if you aren't a FLAGSHIP book So, literally what do they contribute for taking rights of my book in perpetuity?
It will prove too expensive to develop Ai detection tools now and in the future. Ai will be begrudgingly accepted by the most staunchest of critics, just as the printing press was back in the day. 2) Narrative control is becoming a problem in publishing. Publishers are increasingly building the walls that contain the narratives their willing to publish to the exclusion of invading new narrative forces that challenge those heavily fortified narratives.
*एक महिला ने चुनौतीपूर्ण विषय पर की पीएचडी | A Woman did her PhD on a challenging topic* ruclips.net/video/GCh_7m3bGTc/видео.html Please suggest how can i publish my book in international journal
I think ai published books are inevitable. They should be labled prominently as such and have a copyright category exclusive to ai that prevents overrlap into copyright for humans. The bookcovers should prominately state on the front it's ai generated and the authors works used in the programming for the story. Written permission from the authors should be mandatory and fair compensation should be compulsory and legally enforced. 9:58
I believe that AI should have 0 use within publishing.
I wouldn't mind its use in cover design or even blurbs.
Any attempts to use it in generating books are garbage and should be punished most severely.
Same. But I do worry there will be a day when it is impossible to tell whether something was made by an AI or not.
@@tata11kai22 Because the concern for me isn't about screwing anyone over, it's about the art form itself. I'm concerned about "works" that aren't generated by human minds muddling our ability to connect with and better understand each other through art. If there's ever AI-generated artworks in a gallery or museum, that would be different and I would be just a furious about that as AI generated stories at the publishing houses.
I'm concerned about preserving humanity is expression, but outside of that, AI is just a tool people will adapt to using in their jobs. Since a cover is just a marketing tool, and a representation of separate, original artwork (the book) covers are not an original expression and so using AI for them is fine
There are a lot of ways to use AI that go beyond "write the story for me!"
For example, Google recently released notebookLM. It allows you to upload your story and ask questions about your own story like "What are the themes?" or "What is the motivation of character X." The responses have surprised me as very insightful and let me further develop my story.
Another example is Dalle-3. I've asked it to draw my characters, settings, and scenes based on my descriptions. While it's not what I had imagined in my head, seeing it furthered my fantasy.
I've given a paragraph of mine to ChatGPT and told it to make it better or change the tone. While I didn't take the result, seeing what it thought needed changing and some of its changes gave me ideas on what I wanted to do with the paragraph.
AI has been really good for research. It quickly let's me research real places, cultures, dialects, and so on. It hallucinates quite a bit. Sometimes that can be useful for a fantasy story. Other times, you have to fact check it.
@@Exayevie I don’t generally mind covers that aren’t as artistic as others either, but in that case it is a copyright concern if nothing else, and a concern of artists being shafted in favor of cheap AI. Never mind being a tool, I don’t think publishers would hire artists at all if they could just have someone in the marketing department generate an image of a sword for a fantasy book or something, and the likelihood that said image is very close to an existing piece is non zero
Good video, I Have a couple of Ideas for future videos. "Can non-US citizens hire a literary agent to publish a book the traditional way" and "What would be the best time of the year to send your query letter? ".
I already had a bunch of agents asking in their queries if you used AI for your work. I made it very clear that everything they will read, is done by humans, from editor to betas.
I still hope to get an agent next year. Now that one gave me a personal feedback which may increase my chance.
The copyright issue is the big determiner of whether publishing houses accept AI. They won't publish if they can't copyright it, regardless of all other considerations. If copyrighting AI generated content becomes possible, then we will probably see small publishing houses spring up that pump out cheap genre books for non-discriminating readers. Given that the big publishing houses don't have a shortage of manuscripts, I'm not sure they have much motivation to switch to AI because they need to differentiate from the startup AI publishers. The big 5 that don't go out of business will market specifically to the audience who appreciate art and don't want to read AI generated books.
I can see the big publishers using AI to generate more books from their famous writers who have died. So new authors not only have to complete with other writers but also the dead ones 😢
The role of AI in the publishing process is more neuanced then it may initially seem. Consider the tools available today - for instance, Quillbot and Grammarly are now very much AI. These are AI-powered and widely used for enhancing writing. Should their use be restricted or censored? I don’t believe so. Additionally, chatbots can be invaluable for research, a fact I can attest to from personal experience in writing my novel - I checked out the facts using them. A google search is also AI powered. The key point is that the creative core of any work - the plot, characters, scenes, and unique voice - should always originate from the author. AI tools should be seen as aides that enhance and refine the author's vision, not replace the creativity. I suspect most agree with this - but if an agent asked me to say did I use AI should I say no?
Agreed. Google is absolutely AI. Should authors who use search engines be flagged? What about writers in 1980 using a word processor? Or in 2020, watching Alyssa's videos on RUclips? Computer algorithms brought me here, not humans. Some people are quick to adapt or handle change and those are the agents I'd want to work with.
Well research is of course irrelevant. It’s not considered a copyright infringement to ask a historian for facts then include those facts. Editing tools are probably a gray area. Things like Grammarly suggesting better phrases are no more problematic than the old word processor grammar checks imo, but I do wonder how they’d fit into AI copyright law. I think that specifically generating long sections or full works should definitely be “restricted” in the sense that they can’t be granted copyright, and I doubt publishers would knowingly buy something that’s AI generated (if it’s even good enough to get published). It’s not the writer’s work if they didn’t write it.
@@joevaldez6457the difference is that when you search something on google you don’t tend to copy and paste the result directly into the text of your work and then publish it as your own. And for auto corrected grammar that would hardly make up a significant portion, and the ideas themselves would be original. Watching a youtube video is not the same as actually generating text and selling it as your own. That doesn’t seem confusing to me, and there’s no rule, legal or unspoken, that requires authors to write with no advice or research. Search algorithms then have nothing to do with it.
I'd be interested to know how many literary agents are getting laid off. Can you do a video on this?
It's funny that you should mention that ads aren't working as well as some authors might have hoped in getting their books into readers' hands.
Several years ago, I had to suppress the urge to roll my eyes every time a particular author's TV commercials popped up. James Patterson put out a lot of TV ads for several months for a few of his books. I don't know if it worked very well, but if I had to guess, I'd say not. The commercials stopped, and they never returned.
As for me, it's on my bucket list for me to make the rounds of talk shows/podcasts to talk about my books. I'd love to appear on The View. 🙂
Thanks so much for the information. I have many concerns about AI specifically in writing.
Great video. Thank you for the information about finishing your manuscript. I’m about a third of the way through my book and was wondering how polished it needed to be before I sent it literary agents.
The last prediction certainly interests me, for several reasons. I do believe that in the last two years (at least post-pandemic), reading or books as a product, has switched from something mostly private/individual to something you share with a group, often a group of like-minded people (lovers of a certain genre, author, series, ...). One of the major drivers for this I fear, is a growing epidemic of loneliness with people in their 20ies and 30ies. Finding your 'tribe' (in this case through books) is of tremendous value, even if the contact with others is just online. It creates a sense of belonging that many seek today. Translating this to marketing strategy, especially when it comes to the classic bookshop, a library, ... ; I think those places that identify themselves as a place where you can meet 'members of your tribe', are the ones that will come out on top. It will not just be a game of selling books anymore, but it will be a challenge of becoming a place where you can meet likeminded peers, which is something online sales/market places will be in a disadvantage.
OMG! I just saw you in a Nick DiGiovanni short!
Okay…what type of AI? Grammarly is very helpful sometimes 😅
Grammarly is not AI, just a correction programm :-)
Alyssa great video my friend
I very much agree with your 2024 predictions. I believe that AI is rooted in our every day lives. How will agents, the copyright office or publishing houses know if AI is actually used in one’s creation or used to enhance said? Human creativity is magnificent in its own right. AI can breach as it stands. What can one do to defend potential AI breaches?
Alyssa, you are a pleasure!
Can I petition against AI???
What are your best tips for someone going on submission with their agent for the first time? Thanks!
Alexa Donne has videos about sybmission, they're a couple years old now but should still have plenty of relevant info
Hi Alyssa! Love your videos. I'm currently in the process of trying out different ways to shape my query letter, but keep getting sent back to the drawing board by the kind folks over on r/Pubtips. I think my main problem is my MS is an ensemble story, whereas people advise you to stick to a single mc in your letter. This is making it hard to shape the letter in a compelling way. Ultimately, the story is about the shared experience and growth of three characters, not one. Should I stick to one mc in the query and keep throwing it at the wall untill it sticks, or should I try out a version where I have the three characters share the spotlight? I also worry if any agent were to read my manuscript, they might be dissapointed at the multiple pov's after having been promised a single mc.
Take a look at your ms and you'll probably find there is one character that stands out from the others in some way.
What are your favorite ensemble novels, or novels similar to what you wrote? Copy those blurbs.
Great video great Alyssa
I was hoping she was going to talk more about genre trends
Great insights...thanks
How do you know when your manuscript is as strong as it c an be?
Well, I don't like all your predictions, but I agree with them. I will say that authors are finding new ways to connect with readers should be met with excitement. Personally, I've just opened a youtube channel (Frenchie Frier's Story Land should you be curious) for my short stories with the intent of putting out a new story ever other week. I expect to spend the next couple of years figuring out how to do this right and odds are it won't work, but writing is not about playing the probabilities, and it's exciting to be able to do this sort of thing.
What about PROWRITING AID, Scrivener, Hemmingway Editor....Does usage of those considered use of Generative AI??
I consider what I use as "AI assisted editing", with ProWriting Aid's AI tools. I don't believe that's a bad thing, though. A human intelligence helps you edit, and that's not against the rules. But if it writes/rewrite entire sections, then that seems shady. However, humans get away with ghost writers, so... there's that. I kinda like the AI chapter assessments. It tells me if the "feel" I'm going for is captured (in a generic sense). Also, what could be missing that might cause problems for the reader. It's not always right, but usually it gives a couple really useful bullet points. I rarely use the AI suggested sentence changes, although I do like them. I will sometimes select them, but always alter them manually. The AI doesn't understand an author's voice. It really just wants to alter the grammar in a more readable (possibly "appealing") way. I do see value in the AI suggestions, but I find that they rarely ever flow correctly with the rest of the chapter, like the suggestion you'd see from a human editor. All-in-all, I'm quite impressed with AI assisted editing. I set the bar low (i.e. as buggy new technology) and it exceeded several of my expectations.
I’m very disappointed. I get spammed by the email I signed up for to receive the story assessment sheet but I never got that sheet. This is not reflective of your neat and trusted way of content creation. Please do something to solve this issue. My email starts with tu and ends with 2010. Thanks
Hi there - please shoot me an email at hello@alyssamatesic.com and I will resend the story self-assessment!
I use ChatGPT to help me structure my outlines. I give it the information needed and just use it to help me organize it. But not for actual writing. (I also use it as a thesaurus)
Would uses like this need to be disclosed when asked if I used AI?
Are writing tools such as Grammarly seen as a part of the AI spectrum?
You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube. AI is here to stay whether we like it or not. The question is not, "Should AI be allowed?" The question is, "How are we planning to deal with AI in the writing industry?" The quicker we learn to accept it and use it as just another tool, the quicker we stop sounding like luddites bemoaning the changes from quills, to fountain pens, to ballpoint pens, to typewriters, to word processors, to computers. Embrace change and grow, or stagnate and die where you are.
I'm using the general "you" here and not directly pointing this at anyone in particular, especially not the creator of this video, whom I adore!
My biggest questions really fall into the area of AI. Where is the demarcation of acceptable use of AI versus AI created?
As a knowledge tool, most AI can provide sufficient superficial details that quickly fill a need that works akin to a quote dictionary or similar reference guide that others might've used in the past. For example, you might have a point in a scene where you're about to transition the story, and you decide to put the transition moment into the voice of the character. So you decide to quote Alice in Wonderland. What's the difference in using AI, Google, or a physical quote dictionary to go get the exact quote about seeing how far the rabbit hole goes to show your character understanding the story of about to transition and raising the stakes?
What about using it as a copyeditor to help with something like dialogue. You want this particular character in your story to sound a certain way, or you've based them on a specific actor, and due to the complexity of your scene, in your revision process, you've rewritten the dialogue a dozen or so times and can't quite capture the tone you're looking for. You throw that one line into AI with the needed context, and it produced a pretty accurate output that was closer to what you're looking for. How's that different that hiring a copy editor who might come up with, more or less, the exact same output?
Lastly, what about in the outlining process as a note taker and brainstorming tool? I personally use the snowflake method. I've considered using AI to help me build that first outline by going through the steps, having it track my notes, and producing an output of my notes and thoughts through the process. Here's an example. I'm beginning to outline my next project, and had a character that I was about to develop. Because of my main character being a female, I was on the fence about having the primary supporting character be a male, so I just asked GPT it's opinion, and it voiced my exact same concerns I was having, this could create an audience expectation of a romantic relationship, as well as some other cons I hadn't considered, with all the pros being superficial, that role is typically a make dominated role, which further enhanced my concerns of creating the character as a male. What it did do was also give me the pros and cons of using a female and gender fluid character. I hadn't thought to considered gender fluid. But the minute it was suggested, I saw an immense opportunity for conflict and character development that also succinctly tied to themes I've already established for the main character to explore through the story. Since I asked the Chatbot a question in the super early development stages, before I even had a character design in place, when I go query this story in a year, will I need to check that I used AI at one point? Will this exclude me from traditional publishing as nearly all zines and contests explicitly state that AI is to not be used at any stage?
I think there is a vast difference between "Rewrite the boy who cried Wolf as a 100,000 word dark fantasy novel blending the styles of Stephen King, Neil Gaiman, Alfred Hitchcock, and HP Lovecraft," and publishing that, versus, "I need help with this one line of dialogue. Here's the context and what I'm trying to convey. How might I rewrite this to achieve the intended goal in the most concise way possible."
I'd love to hear feedback on these questions.
It's a very challenging querying landscape out there and I've been slogging for months. I've been agented before (twice), with my last agent leaving the profession a year ago. I've had a rough time out in the query trenches, even with two previously published books with a big indie. I'm noticing generally more and more it's a lot less about the quality of the writing and more about the story concept and broadest marketability that's getting picked up. I'm not sure what this means for authors, but I think it's getting more polarised out there - you either need to be a big splashy debut or go indie/self pub. There's less risk being taken in favour of a 'sure thing' except there's no real sure thing in publishing. Also I'm finding the push for underrepresented voices in some ways is not materialising despite a lot of push a few years ago, or editors/agents asking. There are some new authors from underrepresented authors, but definitely not represented like I'd like to see.
Any literary agent with half a brain should 100% reject AI. I would not trust anyone in the book industry who thinks AI is a good idea.
While I agree that AI should not displace human authors, I don't think anything can completely stop it from being used. It's like Kodak resisting digital cameras or movie theaters resisting streaming. You can only swim against the avalanche so long before it consumes you, while those who swim with the avalanche have a better chance of coming out on top. For better or for worse, AI is here to stay. I don't like it, but it's the world we live in.
So contrary to popular advice, it's worth paying for an editor yourself before submitting?
In the current age, I would say yes, unfortunately. I have had an editorial assessment as its much less expensive than a development edit.
Why is it everyone who makes videos about writing waffle on for several minutes before getting to the point. You'd think being writers they would cut out the word waffle.
I agree that humans should write their own books using their own ideas and imaginations. To me, it feels like cheating using AI. I know it's becoming the norm, but call me old fashioned, thats ok. Im in my sixties anyway, so yes, I am old fashioned. 😅 But I prefer sticking to my own imagination to write my books. No AI usage for me thanks very much. 😅
When technology changes the way we live, expect it to influence everything, including publishing. You don’t want to find yourself in a position where you are being left behind or running to catch up. Stay alert, be aware, and thoroughly educated on the benefits and disadvantages of AI.
Amazon ask indie authors if they have used AI in their content when uploading their books.
To me, there's a difference between "Hey ai, write me a compelling romance novel" and have it generate a 300 page book and "Hey ai, I wrote this story. Can you fix punctuation and grammar errors for me ". If you do it the first way, then you are no author and there should be ways to limit and detect that filth. But if you use ai the other way, then in my opinion you're just saving yourself 100s of dollars by not having to pay someone to edit your work. AI isn't all bad but people will take advantage of like they do with anything that could potentially make money. Personally I like the idea of free editing i just hope that means to detect fake work evolves as better ai is invented.
I agree. I am seeing people on various forums/chat groups using AI for everything. Plots, chapters, tweaking each paragraph… the results are very interesting and do make for a good read. However how is a person going to learn their craft if they rely on AI to write every aspect of their book? The kicker is they’ll make more money because of it. I can now more fully understand the reasoning behind the writers strike. I’m struggling as an author and so frustrated by AI.
@@cecelively5515 AI isn't advanced enough yet to be a reliable tool for basic research, let alone sound writing feedback on anything that requires actual discernment. The current crop of AI regurgitates, it does not have actual taste.The people jumping onto AI as it is and using it as a crutch for everything are greatly risking their work in doing so.
The idea of people writing books with AI makes me nauseous. It's not paying homage or giving nods to famous writers, it stealing. Famous writers are suing and hackers are trying to corrupt the system. People compare it to file-sharing like Napster. This isn't sharing a song.
Hey Alyssa. I have been using AI to generate and elaborate on backstory, to speed up production time. Nothing verbatim from the AI gets into a manuscript, but I can put less time into creating a life timeline for characters and that helps me write with more speed and confidence. As for this being a hard time to be querying for a book; you got that right!
@manuscriptfilms6969: let's come to an agreement: you don't tell me my business, and I won't tell you that you're looking backwards, not ahead.
If they allow AI without full disclosure, I’ll have to stop buying new releases. There are plenty of books published before AI was a thing, and I wouldn’t want to accidentally consume filthy AI-produced text.
Me waiting for the publishing industry to get their shit together so I can query = 💀💀💀
I subscribed. And I'd do it again, too.
Don’t you think AI has the potential to eliminate the need for copy editors or - dare I say it - developmental editors? 😂
As an author who has to spend months of her salary just to get one round of edits done, I do hope AI could help in editing. Writing with AI is a big NO for me. But it would help if AI could do some editing work. That is, only with a finished manuscript.
👍
Probably what won't change is that 80% of agents, editors and publishers are female which doesn't help me at all.
Those opposing AI in books have never USED AI in books. It is great for workshopping ideas, revising prose in paragraphs and chapters and doing developmental edits.
I am not interested in ideas that people didn't come up with, period. Books are for transmitting ideas from one mind to another. That means they have to start in a mind. Anything that merely entertains without connecting real people to real people is not worth the paper its printed on.
Agreed. A coding friend gave me a demo of ChatGPT 4.0 and I'm sold on it. AI is a writing assistant, not a writer. It can speed up the 1st draft process considerably, a game changer for those of us with day jobs. AI can do things like describe a train station in Cairo in 1939 in the style of whatever writer it is prompted to. It will not produce final draft quality work. The writer is necessary.
I think AI can help regarding line and copy editing, but everything else should be left to humans.
So, literally what is the value added from the trad pub houses?😂😂
They won't take it unless its polished up
You have to do a substantial bit of marketing yourself if you aren't a FLAGSHIP book
So, literally what do they contribute for taking rights of my book in perpetuity?
They offer distribution and visibility, basically.
A fat check lmaooo
It will prove too expensive to develop Ai detection tools now and in the future. Ai will be begrudgingly accepted by the most staunchest of critics, just as the printing press was back in the day. 2) Narrative control is becoming a problem in publishing. Publishers are increasingly building the walls that contain the narratives their willing to publish to the exclusion of invading new narrative forces that challenge those heavily fortified narratives.
Of course it’ll be harder than it’s ever been. Why would anything be easy for millennials?
*एक महिला ने चुनौतीपूर्ण विषय पर की पीएचडी | A Woman did her PhD on a challenging topic*
ruclips.net/video/GCh_7m3bGTc/видео.html
Please suggest how can i publish my book in international journal