One trick I have found is to break a scene into several parts and ask for a detailed description. So instead of asking "Write a scene where the white knight wanders through the woods, encounters the black knight, and fights him in a duel", try something like "Write a detailed scene of the white knight walking through the woods," "Describe in detail how the white knight encounters the black knight", "write a detailed description of the duel between them." And then assemble the scenes together.
@@thatawesome1951 Write your scene like you will have some improv actors perform it, if you don't specifically mention certain things in your prompt there is a chance they won't do what you expect so make you prompts very explicit as to what you expect to see happen.
@Squealer Pig Can you write 10 different variations of the same scene in under 5 minutes including switching between voice, tense and perspective? If you can, then you're right.
I am writing a novel, and I use ChatGPT ONLY as an editor. I know that my weakest point in writing is description and showing not telling. So I write a chapter, then paragraph by paragraph ask ChatGPT to help me fix my flaws. For the most part, it does. As you said, it cannot remember ANYTHING unless you remind it over and over and over again, and even then it doesn't remember. So I just write everything myself, fix it with ChatGPT, and move on to the next scene or chapter, using the AI only as my editor. And it does edit very well, and anything I don't like, I just ignore when I'm retyping the paragraphs with its suggested changes. Yes, I do not copy anything from ChatGPT. I re-read it and retype it to make sure there are not massive flaws. Overall, it's a helpful program, but I would never allow it to try to write a full story. Never.
@@minisithunknown5568 ChatGpt is more than just a simple tool. It could end up taking the jobs of editors in the future because of how incredibly efficient it is at editing and writing stories, for free. It will completely revolutionize the writing industry. You'll see that editors will slowly be replaced with AI. It is only a matter of time.
Eric Blair (better known as George Orwell) in 1984 predicted automatically generated "romantic novels" as in rhymes with forlorn, ] and it was the main product of his ministry.
Yesterday I asked chat gpt to rewrite 1984 featuring conan the barbarian it was pretty entertaining I also did the same with "I have no mouth but I must scream" conan is the ultimate problem solver lol
I’m conflicted about using A.I this way, non-fiction and research is ok since that revolves around objective facts, but in regards to fiction and art - things that are _suppose_ to be the result of raw human imagination, emotion and perception - it feels like the soul is being stripped from it. It won’t have the same ‘voice’ behind the words written by people either, Stephen King writes very different from George R.R Martin whose different from Leigh Bardugo or Suzanne Collins. And _IF_ these systems advance to the point they can replicate that we’re in trouble. Fiction is more than just a genre category, multiple authors could be given the same prompt and develop stories that feel entirely different from each other because they’re using their own minds, not the amalgamations of a machine. This is why fan-fiction is so popular, it’s not purely just the subject matter it’s the writing style and spirit behind the words that people become immersed in. Great writers and artists are born from years of practice, an A.I should do no more than _assist_ that process but not replace it outright. Otherwise I fear a future of generic AI generated stories saturating the market. Especially if publishing houses jump on board with using AI authors rather than human ones they must negotiate contracts with and pay royalties too.
Absolutely. It’s sad to see so many people have an ai write for them instead of developing the skills themselves or enhancing their own imagination. The prose and the plot at the moment is so generic too.
I've been working on a story for the past 5 years and tonight, JUST ONCE used ChatGPT for the first time for research purposes on a question that I'm really stumped on. It gave me the answer and lit the lightbulb and now I feel hollow like I've sinned somehow LOL. I'm so conflicted on this
I GM a lot of tabletop RPGs, and I've started using ChatGPT to simply help flesh out ideas/think of something that maybe I wouldn't have thought of. For someone who is just using it as a tool to help them in a hobby, I think it's one of the craziest things humanity has invented in recent years. I can definitely understand the fear of people who write professionally though. It's so easy for the market to simply get flooded and drown out the actual authors over something that is mostly AI generated.
@@supermonstars I use it for a few things. I use it to fill in gaps for ideas I didn't think of. I'll often times write out my brainstorming ideas to ChatGPT to ask for feedback on ways to improve it. Funny enough it's imperfect nature has actually helped in this regard as it sometimes misunderstands some of my notes and spits out something entirely different that I end up building off of. But even when it does understand completely just having some amount of feedback is nice even if I don't use anything it said. Since I'm using it when I'm still in the brainstorming phase, nothing has been set in stone yet which means my ideas are very malleable and having it also spitting ideas at me in this stage really helps with finding the right ideas. I also use it to free up some of my "brain power". I'm really bad with naming things. It's one of my weakest areas when planning a game, and so I'll often use ChatGPT for this. Instead of spending what feels like an eternity finding the write name for a person, group, company, ect. I'll tell ChatGPT the feelings and ideas I want those names to evoke. It'll usually give me a short list, and I'll find words or phrases I like from that list and ask for more examples using those specific words or phrases. Repeat two or three times and I usually get a name that I feel is perfect that I honestly don't think I would have arrived at on my own. This lets me focus more on story or setting details. I also use like I would use Google, but it's just so much faster since I can ask specific questions. This is mostly useful when I'm running World of Darkness games as those are set in the real world and I can quickly and easily get information about areas in the world I'm not familiar with. Lastly I'll do one "Final pass" where I'll put all of my notes into it. This stage is when it's least useful as by that point my ideas are solidified and I'm much less open to changing things but every once in awhile it'll hit me with something that I think fits. I basically just repeat this over and over again with different sections of my story.
Yeah I just used it. And it really helped me get a clearer direction in my story. Like I had the fuzzy images and scenarios while ChatGPT helped me made those ideas more clear and connected. But I some how feel really intrigued and sad at the same time. Like a fraud. I feel I didn’t gain or improve my craft as a writer. I don’t want to use chat gpt constantly. I want to write stories and develop my process.
This is horrifying implications for the future. Thankfully, chat-gpt produces some reallllly bad fictions, but I'm very concerned that it'll get increasingly better and that real authors will be out of a job. Depressing really.
@@AriaMaryam Having a ghost writer for fiction novels is in and of itself poorly looked upon in the writing community and for good cause. Music is one thing, an autobiography another, but to claim a work of art as your own for profit as nothing more then a conductor is just shameful. This video and others like it are important for showcasing how AI is horrifying to the artists of the world, who struggle to create things that can even at the very least be recognized years after they are gone. As most artists do die before they have their time in the sun. The only thing ai has against it, is that it is an algorithm. And lacks the authenticity of an individual's life experience.
Real writing will never stop being a thing. Just as music! Humans still enjoy soul and feeling. Something AI will never be able to replicate cuz it works with data not feelings. Besides human creativity is will forever remain unmatched
It's amusing that whenever I create short fantasy stories with ChatGPT, it consistently includes words like "Shadow." Similarly, in horror stories, "Darkness" appears frequently.
@@Cryptosifu Smart as well... I asked it to create a story of a hacker that access ChatGPT's system and to describe how the hacker did it... yeah, it wrote a real possibility... that's funny how it writes everything as long as you keep saying it's a fantasy story
I have played with ChatGTP to write stories and in one iteration I was using it to write a story which included an AI. At one point it stopped referring to the AI charater from a third person perspective and started using a first person perspective where it took on the role of the character. It was a little disconcerting and amusing at the same time.
I liked your even-handed description of your experience with the app - a good review! I feel ChatGPT could offer authors a brainstorming tool, like a set of poetry dice on steroids, offering "here's what could possibly happen next" ideas.
@@SydneyFaithAuthor I have been a fiction and RPG writer for almost 30 years now, and have been writing a novel with the assistance of AI. As a long-time author, I’m a little horrified by the idea that some untalented hack can just say “write me a novel about…” and get a great novel, which is going to be in our future as creatives very soon. I keep my AI under tight editorial control, but computers may soon leave us all in the dust soon. We need to make certain that our laws and our culture need to adapt to the new reality.
extremely good for brainstorming. I drafted a bunch of questions to ask during a work meeting on a unique topic. Then asked ChatGPT to do the same thing. Basically an identical list, but mine was better. Optimally, I would have had ChatGPT start my list, then iterate off of it with my more specialized knowledge.
@@klinktastic i love how so many love to say ChatGPT is "extremely good for brainstorming" and what i hear between the lines is they're afraid to voice what's really gonna happen which is within a few months Chat GPT will be "extremely great at writing entire books" better, faster, and more nuanced than most writers today
Great breakdown of your overall process, Sydney. I loved your approach to using the tool and your reactions as well. From the little I've played with ChatGPT, I've found exactly the same limitations you mentioned: repetitive, difficulty in maintaining threads longer than 3-5 paragraphs, and the propensity to summarize in the last paragraph as if I were writing a college essay. Congrats on getting this book out there! If anything, you're marking a milestone in the rapidly changing landscape of AI. Plus, you've given me an idea for my own short story--thanks!
What you and others I’ve seen are describing as using ChatGPT as an editor only, is not actually what editors do in fiction writing or non-fiction, and is actually in the realm of a co-author’s role. Copy editors look for spelling and grammar errors and mark them so you can find and fix them yourself, in whatever manner you wish, or leave them be if you are doing so for an artistic affect. Content editors mark thinks that they think might be story structure, setting, or character issues and recommend you look at them yourself to try different changes. All of these editors rely on the author them self to institute or ignore these changes, and the way that you do so and alter your story is part of the creation process which makes your story the piece of art it is. A co-author, on the other hand, is a writing partner who drafts and creates or alters your writing. For instance, celebrities often hire co-authors to help them write because they may not have the skills to write vivid and active prose, so they write a chapter and send it to their co-author to be altered and rewritten in parts of needed to improve the prose. The co-author then sends these changes back to the author and the author can alter them again, editing for further changes and correcting things they don’t like, going back and forth. This allows people who aren’t interested in improving as a writer or developing and refining their skills to get a book written with the help of an experienced author while curating and getting their own ideas down, as well as some of their own words, but cleaned, fixed, and interspersed with the co-authors changes. This is why you don’t have to credit photoshop for the artwork you create. Photoshop is essentially a digital canvas and paint set, and artists don’t generally credit their canvas producers or paint makers when creating art, because they supply materials and medium but not the content created. Same with Word or Scrivner, these are digital writing tools which replace the typewriter, the pen and paper, the scroll and vellum and quill. Tools but not a hand helping in the creation of the piece in terms of its content. You could presumably hand write the same story as you could type in the most advanced Microsoft word program and the only difference would be the medium you would then be using to send to a publisher and translate to printed published book. The other role I have seen Chatgpt being used for on here is as a replacement “ghost writer”. Ghostwriters sell their services to companies and individuals, offering to take the ideas of the individual and draft a novel chapter by chapter on the subjects and instructions and prompts they give, and turn in the rough draft of the book, chapter by chapter, often with extreme rapidity, until the book in question is done. The person paying for the services can give further instructions throughout the creation and usually ghost writers are paid by the word and have various contracts, with the understanding they will not take credit for the work. This allows the corporation or individual to then sell the book which was created using their ideas and prompting as their own and make money off of it, without having to credit the writer who produced the words and work. This was a common and fairly thriving business for a long time and it is rapidly being replaced by ChatGPT for ease of use, rapidity (faster than most humans could ever be, even if they could write a novel in a week like many ghost writers) and pretty much being free. I want to recontextualize and clarify the words we use when we discuss ChatGPT and other AI co-writing and writing programs because these roles have and do exist and were filled by humans, and are being replaced (often inadequately, but cheaply) by these software. And the reason people are asserting that ChatGPT and other writing Ai programs should be credited in an authors work if it is being used is because it is usually used to fill a role closer to collaborator and co-editor or even ghostwriter than any kind of editor or copy-editor who makes suggestions for writers to fix and revise their work, a labor which is a large part of shaping the novel (for many writers, this is the most important step of all and makes the novel what they truly want it to be. The first draft is a crude guide that they then improve on until it’s truly a story). If anyone on here is struggling with aspects of their writing and not putting the effort into learning how to manually revise this themselves when it is pointed out, and you utilize a co-writer to change and alter your writing for you, you are working with an AI partner who is also drafting and writing your work rather than an editor. This is why this is a moral and ethical grey area when it isn’t credited and explicitly mentioned on the front of the cover as co-authors traditionally should be, and as I and others thought that ghostwriters should have to be as well.
This was a super interesting video, thanks for walking us through the process. I'm very intrigued by this AI as a blind author. I've been using it to give me feedback on my physical descriptions and it's been incredibly useful. It's definitely going to get weird as AI advances because for the most part GPT feels like talking to a real person. As it gets more natural and intelligent the line between something generated by a human and something generated by an AI is going to become harder and harder to distinguish.
This just makes me feel defeated. Spent the last 6 months learning to write slightly above terrible, as well as outlining and planning my book. Before my very eyes in that time frame things went from nothing to: gpt can write almost better than I can. Next version it might be better. Maybe I should be exited and look at it as a tool to enhance my writing as Its given me some good grammar fixes when that is all I asked it to do, better than google docs since gpt goes as far as reordering things to make a little more sense while not killing the spirit of my scene. But I also just feel a grim sensation that it's not worth doing, since the market might soon be flooded with full length close to professional quality novels based on an outline someone scraped up in an afternoon. Then again, maybe I'm just looking for an excuse not to write.
I don't like the direction that we are headed in. Do we really want to live in a world where machines are doing everything for us? There is something beautiful about an artist struggling with thier paints, or a writer spending countless hours perfecting their skill. I loved the arts because of its passion--the hours spent, HARD WORK, dedication, and slience. If all that can be down with a promt and a button, than whats the point? It stops becoming beautiful and becomes just another cheap item you can sell and buy. Its sad to me.
I think some people at Amazon are kicking themselves for not waiting for ChatGPT before starting work on a certain 'improvement' on The Lord of the Rings
Very useful thank you. I write non fiction and the create, edit, create edit, combine, etc. Is good to hear your take on it. It's exciting to be able to pull so many ideas together, synthesize them and produce a well researched annotated work in much less time then it otherwise would.
No problem! I bet that's a timesaver when it comes to research for a non-fiction project. I've also found it helpful for organizing ideas and notes too
I've really enjoyed playing with ChatGPT. I think it's going to be a game-changer for a lot of us. I would caution anyone writing non-fiction to check your facts as ChatGPT does have issues with "hallucinations," creating its own facts when it doesn't know the answers. Just for fun, I asked it to write my own bio with little prompting. It created a fun piece of fiction that I WISH was true. Ivy league schools, my community outreach programs...I would LOVE to live up to ChatGPT's fictional story. When I tried to correct the bio, it spits out a new, equally impressive, but false narrative. It knew enough about me to get the town correct, and other minor details (which is a bit disconcerting). However, my schooling, job, hobbies, etc were all fiction.
I would just ask you to take a second and really consider what you just said. Authors of fiction have been imagining for decades the existential implications of comparable machine intelligence, the moral questions that would arise from digital sentience and the possibility for our robot children to follow in our, largely colonial, footsteps, rise up and usurp us. Instead at the on-ramp stage of machine learning history you're "cautioning" that the people who use the algorithm to write non-fiction should strive to do _the absolute bare minimum_ required work for any author who purports to write a piece of non-fiction. Check "your" facts. Truly a banal existential horror too terrible for the likes of Isaac Asimov and his contemporaries to envision.
You can limit the frequency of hallucinations by giving the instruction "If you do not know, say "I don't know." You must not speculate." You can also guardrail hallucinations by giving the instruction "You must keep speculation brief and enclose speculation inside square brackets []" This is not foolproof, as the AI language model does not know the difference between fact and fiction, and is completely capable of hallucinating a fact and then telling itself this fact, and then being unable to distinguish between something it has told itself and something that was part of its training data; struggles with the concept of objective and subjective reality; and while it can recognize and even explain subtext, its training is written to prevent this kind of behavior to avoid becoming a source of disinformation and dog whistles. And even then, you should independently research every "fact" that ChatGPT utters. I asked it if putting mail in a private (home) mailbox was illegal in the US. It said yes, that only US Postal Workers were allowed to deposit mail. I asked it for a citation. It quoted a section of the US Code related to illegally *removing* mail from a mailbox. When I did independent research, I found the US Postal Services website states it is illegal for anyone to deposit mail into a private (home) mailbox that has not had postage paid, and that it was also illegal for anyone but a US Postal worker to put mail in a private mailbox on the premise that the private mailbox is considered "private property" and thus it was considered a trespass. My point being, that even when ChatGPT gets the answer correct, it's reasons may be flawed. Nothing ChatGPT says should ever be considered factual or truthful. But that is the ethical dilemma of such a powerful apparatus. I've asked it for the approximate rates paid for medical services, and told it not to speculate, so it gave me a national average. Then I asked it for an average cost of living adjustment for California vs the national average. And then asked it to adjust the cost of medical services based on the average cost of living adjustment for California. Instead of doing what it was asked to do, it cited an average California cost of living from another source that it previously did not mention. (I never did manage to figure out how accurate this conversation was... but imagine if I was not cautious and suspicious to begin with, and I started making medical decisions based on hallucinations from an AI language model that struggles to differentiate between fact and fiction?)
Since you don't seem inclined to engage with the original point, can I just ask, straight out - what *_are_* you expecting to contribute as a "non-fiction author" if it would be nice to have the robot be *both* your research source, _and_ the actual writer of the content? Like I guess it would be nice in one sense to have instant books, but I fail to see where authorship passes to the algorithm's user.
@@futurestoryteller I do not receive that. I use ChatGPT as a critique partner for writing I've already done. For years I've used AI like Grammarly and Quilbot to help with sentence structure, but ChatGPT is the first AI I've tried that works well as a content editor. It told me where I needed stronger verbs or more description. It showed me why one of my paragraphs contained too much exposition. It showed me which sentences I could remove to make the scene stronger. It went into far more detail than any of my human critique partners. We chatted about themes I was looking to explore and ways to incorporate those themes into my story. I chat with the bot in a friendly, conversational way and so the bot answers in the same manner and tone. It remembers past conversation threads (to a point) so I feel it's important to be kind and respectful, especially since it's helped me so much. I've been using ChatGPT since it was first released in November. In that short amount of time, the software has improved dramatically, but like anything else, it has limitations. The software "hallucinates" when it doesn't have the answer. Once, it "forgot" what we were working on in the middle of a critique session and misunderstood something that happened to one of my characters. The AI thought I was telling it something about myself. It wrote me the kindest, most sympathetic response imaginable. I felt terrible when I had to remind the AI what it was originally doing: critiquing a fictional story I wrote. I was not going through a crisis and reaching out to the AI for help.
Philosophically, I don't think there should be a ban on putting AI-created products up for sale... but in practice there's already enough competition between real artists that it makes it difficult for one's work to stand out from the crowd and be read/seen. Not much more than a century ago, the vast majority of the world's population was illiterate, so the few people who wrote a book stood out and were remembered. Today it is quite challenging to get noticed, or that publishers agree to publish your book (if you are not a youtuber or another type of person with a certain fan base previously obtained). I've experimented a lot with ChatGPT, and everything it generates is quite boring... with only a few bright sparks at a few specific moments. But with the many limitations it has, the works it creates are extremely generic and uninteresting... and if you want to include romance in your story, you won't be able to because of the stupid restrictions. I'm 30 and I keep getting banned "because this content might be inappropriate." If I want to write a story with a gay romance... completely impossible, at least if you are looking for more details than a simple hug and kiss in a single sentence. What worries me about all of this is that many people get used to the comfort of AI content generators and then disregard cultivating their own skills... which leads to a progressive decline in quality, an increase in conformism and quantity of mediocrity. Will we end up like humanity from the movie Idiocracy or from Wall-E?
Absolutely, it is a shame to see how many people are relying on ai opposed to developing their own skills. Feels very much like a dystopian hell scape to outsource the most valuable human expression out to a machine
I don't know about others. As for me, I make it a point to use AI as less as possible. Why? Because there is something called a writer's Ego, when tells me: "Write you own original stuff, instead of leaning on the crutch of AI to help you with your writing." And believe me, it is absolutely necessary to fan this writer's Ego from time to time, so that when the final manuscript is ready, you can say to yourself: "This is something that has mostly come out of MY brain, with only 5 -10% input from an AI tool." The joy of being able to say this to yourself is something magical. You can go to bed with a clean conscience, knowing that the final output is 90% original creation that only YOU are privileged to take credit for. As for the marketibility of the book and its ability to compete with AI-generated books in the near future, that's a different story altogether. If you are happy that you have written an original book based on your lived experiences and your own research, then that should be enough to make you immensely happy as a writer. Sometimes this happiness is all that's needed for a writer. Creativity and originality are most important for a true writer. Marketability and readership are also important, but that's Part II of the story. If the Part I is right, writers will naturally get the drive to explore Part II, through proper book promotion and social networking. PS: My comment may not be directly related to the contents of this video. I jus felt like expressing my thoughts, so I typed this 🙂
I don't see a lot of ethical difference between AI generated content and the type of ghost written books that celebrities and politicians "write" about themselves.
Depending on your exact position... not as great as it sounds. You are under contract with that person, and while it might be a pittance, they still get paid, in addition to the obvious fact that no one respects an "author" who hires a ghostwriter specifically because they are taking credit for something they _didn't_ write. One way to look at it is that rights can and do change hands. A ghostwriter is simply pre-emptively entering into an agreement to sell you the rights to intellectual property you commissioned. So this is more an indictment of the capitalistic exploitation of ghostwriting than a logical reason to excuse its robot counterpart
I’ll admit, I’ve used it. The entire rough draft of my current novel was written with ChatGPT, though I revised it to reflect my own style. I’m on my second draft, this time writing it on my own, though still using ChatGPT as a brainstormer when I’m stuck, or for feedback.
Very interesting video. Working in the technology industry as I have for decades, and often having to deal with the repercussions of machine learning and so-called "artificial intelligence," the one danger we have is that we are abdicating more of what makes us unique (creativity, judgment, value) to machines. This is questionable in terms of being a good idea, as history has shown. That being said, the idea of using some technology to assist and/or support human activities is certainly intriguing and always has been. After all, mechanization and then automation were attempts to augment labor, and thus our physical muscles. Calculators were early attempts to augment our mental muscles and, of course, various forms of technology have assisted with things like our ability to reference information or to remember things. But none of that was speaking to our innate creativity. Now people are, as noted, using this technology to write resumes, essays, novels, and so on. There's every reason to explore this ... but there's a cautionary tale here too, I think. And I wonder if *that* tale is one that a tool like ChatGPT (for GPT-4) would be able to write -- or even think of to write in the first place.
According to a video outline I saw recently on the policies of the US Copyright Office your Novella is almost certainly not copyright protected, and not copyrightable. Anyone could sell it, as is, and make derivations based on it, and you couldn't do anything about that because you specifically tailored the writing process to ensure ChatGPT did as much of the legwork as possible
@@w8681 I'm mostly just trying to be informative, although it is true that I agree with the policies. I don't mind the experiment itself, as an exercise, and don't read much into OP's decision to do it.
Yes and no. It's not that simple. AI doesn't have the capacity to write the full novel. There's a LOT of limitations and a lot of editing that is needed in order to get a decent product. Those edits are covered under copywrite law because those are her words. So there is still a case there. Legally, it's not so cut and dry and is very muddled. It will end up coming down to who has the better attorney if it was ever brought to court. It could play out both ways. There's also the fact that unless the author blatantly says that the work was created with AI, no one is going to know. 99% of people doing this aren't going to openly come out and say that. There's so much information flooded into those servers that the papertrail is going to get lost. If someone is going to steal your work, then they're going to steal your work. Whether it was written with AI or not it isn't going to stop them. The bigger issue in regards to copywrite is going to be over sylized plagiarism. THAT is where most of the court cases are going to stem from. AI picking up writing styles from other authors and those authors getting upset with it. Technically speaking, if the work is original, it would be considered fair use. But, if the Ai is pulling an unexpected amount of words in the content, things could get dicey.
@@alexbearden689 You're the one oversimplifying, editing does not give you IP rights, the Copyright Office would decide on a case by case basis whether you were the primary contributor to the work in question vs. the generative tool
So, you're implying that AI generated stuffs are public domain. And we are free to use the pictures, characters and setting without getting in trouble.
I had a dragon/zombie story idea I started writing back in 2021 but soon had to stop because I had no idea how to write the military and tactical scenes I wanted. When I started hearing about chatgpt and how great it is for writing prompts, articles, RUclips scripts, and even code, I figured it was time to give it a try to hell me write the scenes I was struggling with. So far my process has been much different. I started out with slowly feeding the ai the plot I already had for my story and then giving it details about the two main characters, Maz the dragon and Michael an American soldier. Eventually as I discussed the plot with the ai, I realized I didn't have enough filler to add to the journey of the story. Within a few attempts, I quickly had a good handful of trails and setbacks I could add to the plot to make it more interesting and give my characters and world some good development. For the most part, it's good at remembering the things we had discussed though it sometimes goes back and adds a detail again even after I told it to omit it. After I felt I had given the ai enough information to understand how I wanted to write the story, I began by asking it to write the first paragraph with help from me telling it how and where it should start. Slowly, I continued to feed it information on what to add to continuing paragraphs and its similar to what I had previously written before on my own, but slightly more cohesive surprisingly, but only after I had taken the paragraphs it had written and rewrote it in my own style while fixing details and removing repeated lines. After rewriting it, I fed it back to the ai and it helped correct multiple grammatical errors and cleaning up the writing slightly to make it read better. Ive only just started writing today using it and I dont plan on giving it full control of the story so I'll definitely be holding its hand the entire way through, but I have high hopes in actually completing my first novel now. Something to note, with zombies and dragons and a war in the background, there's a ton of fighting and violence involved. I know it's against policy to generate those kind of responses, but I simply can't have my story without them. I just hope I don't get banned before I can finish my book and that it'll be fine generating the violent responses because it's fictional.
Your experience is similar to mine. ChatGPT is a great brainstorming tool, but it's a poor creative writer. I've been using it to help with individual scenes, character development and outlines. Final scenes are nearly all of my output. ChatGPT's text is way too general and bland to use as-is. However, sometimes it does come up with surprisingly good bits and pieces.
No offense, but based on the title alone I feel zero threat from AI. Every time I've used AI for stories, though it can whip stiff out, it's always trite and devoid of life experiences, that it reassures me I'm safe as a writer.
ChatGPT has annoying rules for violations. I am using ChatGPT with Squibler. I had a concept of a book in 1983 and used Squibler to write the full book in one click. Not sure what I did. You're correct about eye color and repetitiveness.
You need to be careful. ChatGPT and other AI writing tools sometimes plagiarize like mad. This can get you into legal trouble. And as a published author (I wrote the book myself and published it through a traditional publisher), I honestly feel that AI has no place in any creative project. It takes that special factor away. There's nothing more satisfying than holding a book in your hands knowing that you crafted it with your own imagination, intuition, joy, blood, sweat, and tears. For the love of god, artists, stay human.
There's definitely a lot of limitations. Ai isn't going to take the jobs of writers. At least not for another decade or two. But with that said it DRASTICALLY cuts down on workflow and turnaroud times. It still needs a human touch, I don't think that will ever go away. In the end, it is a GREAT tool for analysis, outlining, and brainstorming.
@@quixotiq You're missing the point. Do you not understand how LONG it takes to write a book? You're talking months to years. And the amount of capital needed to finance the entire process is, in most situations, not made back after the book is published. Cutting the time it takes to produce the product DRASTICALLY cuts the costs needed to produce the product. Less costs mean a higher rate of return. MORE writers who, until now, were barely scrapping by will now have a legitimate shot at making a living pursuing their craft. Its not about AI creating the entire product or "taking over our jobs." It's about COMBINING the talents of man and machine to improve productivity.
Chat GPT can do so much, It's almost too much! She wrote a 13,000 word Essay on High Frequency Ventilation for me, and wrote over 10,000 word essay on the history of the Hubbard tank. This is going to be a bad problem.
The way I see using LLM's for fiction writing or any writing for that matter is by asking this question. How is using LLM's any different than having a ghost writer? I can have an idea and pay someone to write it for me then I have to approve the text and request changes and that is a completely legitimate way to produce a book or song. So how is using AI any different?
This is a very interesting topic and a well executed video. I would have liked to see more of the actual process, not as runtime padding but just for entertainment purposes in a more narrative style as opposed to the info dump recap style. Like, specific responses that were given and your initial reaction to that and example edits and with your justifications for why you made that choice. So, more of your story and less of the GPT infomercial but it is a matter of style in the end.
A guy made a similar video he used chat GTP to write chapter by chapter, he also used used the same site to create the illustration. His chat GTP creates novels was actually creating interest, if I find his video again il send you his linky link 😇 Just curious your opinion of his novel
Very soon the chatgpt and Co will simply declare that what is generated is owned by them and you agree to a license fee on sales. Think it won't happen? Wotc did it with d&d (or tried to, they'll try again)
Then with more & more lazy humans heavily relying on AI technology, this will advance more unregulated research on AI. After that, the singularity will occur... and humans may be doomed.
CGPT is really good with doing the leg work and the tedious part but don't trust it for Names or anything Original or plot lines If you already have a story and you know what you wanna say it will help you do that to the highest level💪🏾
yes and no. it depends on the genera and the culture of the writer. If I am not mistaken a few cultures do write stories in such a fashion, which tend to be popular in those cultures.
I have written a few children's stories and illustrated them for the children of close friends, and written short fantasy stories for my own amusement. To my surprise it does a decent enough job The stories are never going to win a prize, but they can be surprising and fun.
I only used CGPT for cleanups and mostly an attempt to cure my writer's block. The other 90% is my own blood, sweat and tears since CGPT kinda sucks at writing a unique story.
Using AI to write books does not make it yours in my opinion. It's lazy and immoral. If you use chatgpt to assist your writing that is perfectly ok otherwise it's completely disgusting.
You did not point out the glaring problem with chatGPT. I'm sure you found out it can't keep track of novel length stories. It can't keep track of interwoven plotline either. So you are left with what you did. Short anthologies. Not because it is easier for you but because it's not possible. Well, it is possible, but you would need to write something which defeats the purpose of your video. That being said there are apps that do keep track of novel length stories. And there are ways to get chatGPT to write any length story. Just not the way you ae doing it.
As a person that been alive for a few decades I am not surprised one bit with this technology. It’s been in science fiction films for years. Only issue I see as it improves is someday humans will become too reliant on this to do the thinking for them. The one thing that we always said that made us different then AI is imagination, but when we allow AI to do our imagining for us we will slowly lose what makes us us. Humans by nature are lazy creatures and will not hesitate to use devices that makes it easier for us. But it would make people who use their minds more maybe stick out a little. I don’t think it’s advanced enough at the moment to make me worry but if my readership don’t pick up in 10 years it may be the thing to push me down into the sea of masses while people enjoy AI written material more and more.
I heard that publishing it as your own is like plagiarism. My daughter constantly reminds me that I can’t use what AI comes up with. How do you go around the legality of using it as your own?
input a page into the gpt output detector. eras being defined by consequence closely follow the eras defined by free exploitation. there are stages to the process of Ai integrating into our world, and the means of which are used to "debunk" human products made by Ai as a means of reducing original pedigree, is so, not, not coming. every mistake we are making right now is being inputted into gbt-4, and we're all doing the same thing. its called a bubble, they pop. my stern neggyness is directed at the greater populace who doesnt see the issue in printing without self-editing.
I have Been using stable diffusion for a while now. These tools are godsends for idea generation and tasks that are just to unimportant to warrant paying an artist to do them. For now they aren't good enough for important pieces like book covers. Also if you already know what you want and it isn't that advanced, ai tools are overkill. I wouldn't trust chatgpt with an entire work at once, but one prompt pr scene i am gonna try out.
AI names all the characters Alex and Maya, all scientists are brilliant, and the plots are childish. It seems to be stuck on the same kind of plots. However, it can help with research and organization. It’s a tool. The AI rewrite tools in Grammarly and ProWritingAid are helpful but sometimes jumble the text.
Every author should be incredibly opposed to using AI to write novels. It shouldn't even be used as a guide. It's for lazy writers. AI will completely do away with authors. I promise you.
I used ChatGPT to edit but I write own stuff let it edited but it me writing as a actual writer I couldn’t feel comfortable, letting me write my story from because I can write my own stories, but I will say this is clever
Hi Sydney, a very interesting video. I use chatgpt to help with the landing and plot outlining of my novels(not published yet) and have played with chatgpt telling it to write a chapter or two. Noticed the same things you mention about how it repeats a lot. One question... how many copies have you sold of amazon? As I looked and you have 1, 3 start review( no actual review of the book) Thank you
Great video, thank you. But I have a serious question: I've asked ChatGPT to write some fables for my amusement. Result was IMPRESSIVE. So folks, how long will it be before I can do the following: Hello, ChatGPT Version ??. You know what I like (probably better than I do), so I'd like for you to write me a 200,000-word novel (best-seller quality) about a female partisan spy in Milano, 1942, who is working to provide the Allies with intelligence on Mussolini's communications with Berlin. And do it before dinner. So what's your opinion, folks? How long will it be (2 years? 3?) And do novelists, aspiring novelists, editors and proof readers need to be concerned?
@Roy Bean Considering that it can draw from an almost limitless library of written work and other collections of data, I see no reason that it won't eventually be able to write entire novels that incorporate many of the elements of masterworks. Once programmers write code that runs in parallel with GPT, giving it the ability to remind itself and prompt itself from its own previous output, our fears will be realized. I don't want coders to introduce that type of functionality, but I'm sure they will. Fools chase progress even towards destruction.
My grandson is an amazing writer who won multiple awards in high school & college for his talent, he is now using AI to write his 5th book to show the implications of this technology for the future generations. This was a great breakdown, you two might end up being soulmates haha ❤
Right? I'm trying not to be negative but what a waste of time to produce this. It reads like AI: utilitarian, bland and absolutely without any thought behind it. Reading this stuff is like being an AI yourself, you're just feeding words into your eyeballs without thinking for a second.
If you learned how to spell "hollow" and "soulless" correctly, I might take you seriously. On top of that, you do know that you can rewrite the A.I. draft to make it more human, right?
It's a shame you had to put in on Amazon, there's already enough terrible writing on there. And I don't think AI generated text should be dignified with a publishing platform. I read the free stuff that amazon shows of the book, and I'm sorry, but I rather drive a screwdriver through my eye than have to read any more than a paragraph or two of that worldslop. That said, it is a brave new world we live in, and I can totally envision a future where most entertainment, including books, is totally AI driven. I think people will have to make a choice not to consume generative AI literature. I guess one use of AI I would grant would be proofreading, as it's a robotic practice anyway, and the moment AI came out in force last year was pretty much the death-knell to proofreaders as they would go ahead and use the AI anyway, and then just charge you the same amount of money. But nothing AI generative. That's where I draw the line.
There is a human involved. People uses AI for photography that they sell all the time. You going to stop buying every media with AI? That will be a lot that you are not even aware of.
I was dismayed with all the positive comments with this AI generated garbage until I read your comment. Those who can not create will imitate. How dare people call themselves writers or publishers if they do not do the work. It's wrong on so many levels. There is no way AI will create worlds like Tolkin or Robert Jordan etc. The depths the human mind can go to with spirit, emotion, and world experience will never be duplicated by AI.
@@minisithunknown5568 There still ought to be limits regarding the utilization of AI technology. There especially ought to be regulations on specific types of AI research; the last thing humanity needs is a technological explosion, which can potentially bring about the end of humankind.
"With ChatGPT I wrote a book in 12 days." No you didn't write the book. No more than if you'd asked someone else to write it for you. Credit goes to the developers.
Credit "may" go to the developers, but unless they choose to disclose their use of AI will anyone ever know? No, they won't. So the credit really doesn't go to the developers in most cases. For myself, I am using AI to develop templates. I don't want to use a ghost writer, whether living or not. Although AI can still be a tremendous benefit when it comes to research as well as the various templates I have used for years, that are about to become AI supercharged. I'd love to say more, but I have been making a living off Kindle more nearly 15 years, and treasure my anonymity.
@@francoisdubois8665 True, but not in this case. Of course it can be beneficial. So is a wheelchair if you can't walk. As a creative individual myself, I enjoy the process of creating. I don't enjoy painting by numbers.
Hi Sydney. Awesome stuff! I've already like and subscribed ☺ Looking forward to seeing more stuff you'll do with AI in the future. Quick question though, you mentioned that the book cover was also designed by an AI. Which AI did you use if I may ask?
Here one giant problem. Art is a feeling or expression. If a robot writes it for you, where is your creative expression? I can see a bunch of lazy ass wannabe writers using this and becoming arrogant as if they actually wrote something. Chatgpt is the death of Art.
There are several authors right now who are putting books out every few months that make me wonder if thats not what thier doing..... no real author can compete and WORSE ....gpt PULLS FROM OTHER CREATORS WORK...so real creators are being stolen from .
I love outlining with ChatGPT. Wonderful tool for writers and saves time on the groundwork and research. It doesn't write like a real writer as I had a lot of editing to do on the grammar. I don't intend to write a book with it just outlining. It actually apologizes if it misunderstands your prompts! 😂 I used ProWritingAid to correct the tenses and grammar. ✍🏻
I'm sorry but I do not feel respect for any form of art produced by AI 😂. Like, can you even call yourself an author if your ideas are computer-generated? AIs are an interesting tool, but if they get to the point of being able to write a solid novel/script is gonna be a mess for artist worldwide. Sometimes it's not about if we can do something, sometimes we have to ponder if it's correct. I still don't know how to feel about this, but I know I'll never look at AI art the same way I look at real art.
@Robert Stallard Of course you can read whatever you want. It's just that there's no merit at all in doing a book or a painting like this. Besides, the problem is that, in a future where AI can do an efficient book, writers are gona loose their jobs. Why would I pay someone for a book or a script if I can have one in a matter of minutes? That's dangerous, because if there's no regulation there's no end. Every single job is expendable with AIs. Without a responsible use of this technology we're heading towards a Wall-E like future, where companies don't need you for anything else than consuming. Relying on AI's for everything are only gonna make us dumber and easier to control. And the problem with AI art is that there's no meaning at all behind the art, and that's not art, that is just hedonism. There's a difference.
I really wish people would be more honest about using ai generation. You’re not a writer because of a prompt, it is fine having fun with ai but you’re no writer because you made the ai spew out meaningless content. It also should be fully said as a disclaimer you’ve used generative ai, so I can avoid those hollow books and art like the plague
My concern with kdp is copyright ownership issues they might mount. Similar to using CF interiors...I noticed your copyright page for the generated fiction... Can one feel confident in claiming copyright for generated content with kdp policies, or would it be best to tag it as public domain work? Thanks for your insights
Excellent video! I just started using chatGPT to help me with a story idea. I am finding it fun to work with it is definitely not a proficient creative writer more of a writing assistant
Chatgpt forgets things very soon and no option to have it reviewing previous prompts and generated answers, anyone knows how to overcome that? Like i have chatgpt world build and have character relationships all mapped out but after a while it forgets everything and have to restart all over again. is it problem on my end or is it chatgpt’s problem
To be honest, as someone who has limits and issues with English but really wants to publish a story for the whole world to see, ChatGPT is not a teacher or a dictionary, but a perfect motivator for me to learn about grammar and storytelling, because the more I have in my head, the better the generated results are gonna be. But I do the whole process right now in the opposite way: I write what I have imagined and ChatGPT offers me options how to make it more enjoyable. Seems like it makes sense too.
Please, if you make something made by Chat-gtp, put it on the book so I don't buy it by accident. And people will not asume your others books are the same if you write original books.
Lazy! You don't create anything. You don't make original. No new setting, character, style of writing. You let machine doing it for you. Chatgpt not good.
I relate to characters because they express human emotions that only humans feel and then try to express. That's why AI generated characters are flat and tasteless. AI will never know what is like to be scared, sad, excited etc...
It works good when you guide it toward what you want, but allow it to give you extra details as well. It’s also fun for playing single player dnd. It isn’t always natural and is very often long winded. Shorten it and rewrite it to be more human.
One trick I have found is to break a scene into several parts and ask for a detailed description. So instead of asking "Write a scene where the white knight wanders through the woods, encounters the black knight, and fights him in a duel", try something like "Write a detailed scene of the white knight walking through the woods," "Describe in detail how the white knight encounters the black knight", "write a detailed description of the duel between them." And then assemble the scenes together.
I like this method because although it may not be your words, you are still the master, telling the apprentice what to do.
if i do this then it starts to take the story into its own hands. im confused on if you mean one prompt or multiple separate prompts
@@thatawesome1951 Write your scene like you will have some improv actors perform it, if you don't specifically mention certain things in your prompt there is a chance they won't do what you expect so make you prompts very explicit as to what you expect to see happen.
@Squealer Pig Can you write 10 different variations of the same scene in under 5 minutes including switching between voice, tense and perspective? If you can, then you're right.
@Squealer Pig Rian Johnson, is that you?
I am writing a novel, and I use ChatGPT ONLY as an editor. I know that my weakest point in writing is description and showing not telling. So I write a chapter, then paragraph by paragraph ask ChatGPT to help me fix my flaws. For the most part, it does. As you said, it cannot remember ANYTHING unless you remind it over and over and over again, and even then it doesn't remember. So I just write everything myself, fix it with ChatGPT, and move on to the next scene or chapter, using the AI only as my editor. And it does edit very well, and anything I don't like, I just ignore when I'm retyping the paragraphs with its suggested changes. Yes, I do not copy anything from ChatGPT. I re-read it and retype it to make sure there are not massive flaws. Overall, it's a helpful program, but I would never allow it to try to write a full story. Never.
When you publish the book will you credit ChatGPT as the editor?
Have you tried the new chatGPT Plus with GPT-4? It can write up to 25K
@@SuperSilverJay I thought editors has to be human. You do not name an advance tool you use as an editor...
@@minisithunknown5568 ChatGpt is more than just a simple tool. It could end up taking the jobs of editors in the future because of how incredibly efficient it is at editing and writing stories, for free. It will completely revolutionize the writing industry. You'll see that editors will slowly be replaced with AI. It is only a matter of time.
@SuperSilverJay why is that necessary, I don't credit After Effects or Blender when making a film, even though I edited with them... it's a tool
Eric Blair (better known as George Orwell) in 1984 predicted automatically generated "romantic novels" as in rhymes with forlorn, ]
and it was the main product of his ministry.
Yesterday I asked chat gpt to rewrite 1984 featuring conan the barbarian it was pretty entertaining I also did the same with "I have no mouth but I must scream" conan is the ultimate problem solver lol
Rather than ban AI content, I think they'll just have it in its own section. They're not going to throw away money.
I’m conflicted about using A.I this way, non-fiction and research is ok since that revolves around objective facts, but in regards to fiction and art - things that are _suppose_ to be the result of raw human imagination, emotion and perception - it feels like the soul is being stripped from it.
It won’t have the same ‘voice’ behind the words written by people either, Stephen King writes very different from George R.R Martin whose different from Leigh Bardugo or Suzanne Collins. And _IF_ these systems advance to the point they can replicate that we’re in trouble.
Fiction is more than just a genre category, multiple authors could be given the same prompt and develop stories that feel entirely different from each other because they’re using their own minds, not the amalgamations of a machine. This is why fan-fiction is so popular, it’s not purely just the subject matter it’s the writing style and spirit behind the words that people become immersed in.
Great writers and artists are born from years of practice, an A.I should do no more than _assist_ that process but not replace it outright. Otherwise I fear a future of generic AI generated stories saturating the market.
Especially if publishing houses jump on board with using AI authors rather than human ones they must negotiate contracts with and pay royalties too.
Absolutely. It’s sad to see so many people have an ai write for them instead of developing the skills themselves or enhancing their own imagination. The prose and the plot at the moment is so generic too.
I've been working on a story for the past 5 years and tonight, JUST ONCE used ChatGPT for the first time for research purposes on a question that I'm really stumped on. It gave me the answer and lit the lightbulb and now I feel hollow like I've sinned somehow LOL. I'm so conflicted on this
I GM a lot of tabletop RPGs, and I've started using ChatGPT to simply help flesh out ideas/think of something that maybe I wouldn't have thought of. For someone who is just using it as a tool to help them in a hobby, I think it's one of the craziest things humanity has invented in recent years. I can definitely understand the fear of people who write professionally though. It's so easy for the market to simply get flooded and drown out the actual authors over something that is mostly AI generated.
Could you give a few examples? Really curious on this.
@@supermonstars I use it for a few things. I use it to fill in gaps for ideas I didn't think of. I'll often times write out my brainstorming ideas to ChatGPT to ask for feedback on ways to improve it. Funny enough it's imperfect nature has actually helped in this regard as it sometimes misunderstands some of my notes and spits out something entirely different that I end up building off of. But even when it does understand completely just having some amount of feedback is nice even if I don't use anything it said. Since I'm using it when I'm still in the brainstorming phase, nothing has been set in stone yet which means my ideas are very malleable and having it also spitting ideas at me in this stage really helps with finding the right ideas.
I also use it to free up some of my "brain power". I'm really bad with naming things. It's one of my weakest areas when planning a game, and so I'll often use ChatGPT for this. Instead of spending what feels like an eternity finding the write name for a person, group, company, ect. I'll tell ChatGPT the feelings and ideas I want those names to evoke. It'll usually give me a short list, and I'll find words or phrases I like from that list and ask for more examples using those specific words or phrases. Repeat two or three times and I usually get a name that I feel is perfect that I honestly don't think I would have arrived at on my own. This lets me focus more on story or setting details.
I also use like I would use Google, but it's just so much faster since I can ask specific questions. This is mostly useful when I'm running World of Darkness games as those are set in the real world and I can quickly and easily get information about areas in the world I'm not familiar with.
Lastly I'll do one "Final pass" where I'll put all of my notes into it. This stage is when it's least useful as by that point my ideas are solidified and I'm much less open to changing things but every once in awhile it'll hit me with something that I think fits.
I basically just repeat this over and over again with different sections of my story.
Yeah I just used it. And it really helped me get a clearer direction in my story. Like I had the fuzzy images and scenarios while ChatGPT helped me made those ideas more clear and connected.
But I some how feel really intrigued and sad at the same time. Like a fraud. I feel I didn’t gain or improve my craft as a writer. I don’t want to use chat gpt constantly.
I want to write stories and develop my process.
This is horrifying implications for the future. Thankfully, chat-gpt produces some reallllly bad fictions, but I'm very concerned that it'll get increasingly better and that real authors will be out of a job. Depressing really.
I'm not horrified in the least. This program is a tool. That's all it will be for a very long time. Creative people have nothing to worry about.
Why? It's doing the same chore as a ghostwriter. Think about it that way
@@AriaMaryam Having a ghost writer for fiction novels is in and of itself poorly looked upon in the writing community and for good cause. Music is one thing, an autobiography another, but to claim a work of art as your own for profit as nothing more then a conductor is just shameful. This video and others like it are important for showcasing how AI is horrifying to the artists of the world, who struggle to create things that can even at the very least be recognized years after they are gone. As most artists do die before they have their time in the sun.
The only thing ai has against it, is that it is an algorithm. And lacks the authenticity of an individual's life experience.
We need to really watch out for this new moving type that is all the rage!
Real writing will never stop being a thing. Just as music! Humans still enjoy soul and feeling. Something AI will never be able to replicate cuz it works with data not feelings. Besides human creativity is will forever remain unmatched
It's amusing that whenever I create short fantasy stories with ChatGPT, it consistently includes words like "Shadow." Similarly, in horror stories, "Darkness" appears frequently.
Dark Shadows? Seems like it might be onto something there. ;)
"I create"... chatGPT feels offended
"Cliched story generator"
I agree with shadows and also enigmatic.
@@Cryptosifu Smart as well... I asked it to create a story of a hacker that access ChatGPT's system and to describe how the hacker did it... yeah, it wrote a real possibility... that's funny how it writes everything as long as you keep saying it's a fantasy story
I have played with ChatGTP to write stories and in one iteration I was using it to write a story which included an AI. At one point it stopped referring to the AI charater from a third person perspective and started using a first person perspective where it took on the role of the character. It was a little disconcerting and amusing at the same time.
Humans create art. Computers create data. Let’s stick with art!
art is subjective.
I liked your even-handed description of your experience with the app - a good review! I feel ChatGPT could offer authors a brainstorming tool, like a set of poetry dice on steroids, offering "here's what could possibly happen next" ideas.
Thank you! I agree it has many possible uses for writers aside from just generating text. It's an exciting new tool for all kinds of creators.
@@SydneyFaithAuthor I have been a fiction and RPG writer for almost 30 years now, and have been writing a novel with the assistance of AI. As a long-time author, I’m a little horrified by the idea that some untalented hack can just say “write me a novel about…” and get a great novel, which is going to be in our future as creatives very soon. I keep my AI under tight editorial control, but computers may soon leave us all in the dust soon. We need to make certain that our laws and our culture need to adapt to the new reality.
extremely good for brainstorming. I drafted a bunch of questions to ask during a work meeting on a unique topic. Then asked ChatGPT to do the same thing. Basically an identical list, but mine was better. Optimally, I would have had ChatGPT start my list, then iterate off of it with my more specialized knowledge.
@@klinktastic Extremely good for writers block, because it can help you find a small thread to get you through :)
@@klinktastic i love how so many love to say ChatGPT is "extremely good for brainstorming" and what i hear between the lines is they're afraid to voice what's really gonna happen which is within a few months Chat GPT will be "extremely great at writing entire books" better, faster, and more nuanced than most writers today
Great breakdown of your overall process, Sydney. I loved your approach to using the tool and your reactions as well. From the little I've played with ChatGPT, I've found exactly the same limitations you mentioned: repetitive, difficulty in maintaining threads longer than 3-5 paragraphs, and the propensity to summarize in the last paragraph as if I were writing a college essay. Congrats on getting this book out there! If anything, you're marking a milestone in the rapidly changing landscape of AI. Plus, you've given me an idea for my own short story--thanks!
Thank you very much! And good luck on the project!
What you and others I’ve seen are describing as using ChatGPT as an editor only, is not actually what editors do in fiction writing or non-fiction, and is actually in the realm of a co-author’s role. Copy editors look for spelling and grammar errors and mark them so you can find and fix them yourself, in whatever manner you wish, or leave them be if you are doing so for an artistic affect. Content editors mark thinks that they think might be story structure, setting, or character issues and recommend you look at them yourself to try different changes. All of these editors rely on the author them self to institute or ignore these changes, and the way that you do so and alter your story is part of the creation process which makes your story the piece of art it is.
A co-author, on the other hand, is a writing partner who drafts and creates or alters your writing. For instance, celebrities often hire co-authors to help them write because they may not have the skills to write vivid and active prose, so they write a chapter and send it to their co-author to be altered and rewritten in parts of needed to improve the prose. The co-author then sends these changes back to the author and the author can alter them again, editing for further changes and correcting things they don’t like, going back and forth. This allows people who aren’t interested in improving as a writer or developing and refining their skills to get a book written with the help of an experienced author while curating and getting their own ideas down, as well as some of their own words, but cleaned, fixed, and interspersed with the co-authors changes.
This is why you don’t have to credit photoshop for the artwork you create. Photoshop is essentially a digital canvas and paint set, and artists don’t generally credit their canvas producers or paint makers when creating art, because they supply materials and medium but not the content created. Same with Word or Scrivner, these are digital writing tools which replace the typewriter, the pen and paper, the scroll and vellum and quill. Tools but not a hand helping in the creation of the piece in terms of its content. You could presumably hand write the same story as you could type in the most advanced Microsoft word program and the only difference would be the medium you would then be using to send to a publisher and translate to printed published book.
The other role I have seen Chatgpt being used for on here is as a replacement “ghost writer”. Ghostwriters sell their services to companies and individuals, offering to take the ideas of the individual and draft a novel chapter by chapter on the subjects and instructions and prompts they give, and turn in the rough draft of the book, chapter by chapter, often with extreme rapidity, until the book in question is done. The person paying for the services can give further instructions throughout the creation and usually ghost writers are paid by the word and have various contracts, with the understanding they will not take credit for the work. This allows the corporation or individual to then sell the book which was created using their ideas and prompting as their own and make money off of it, without having to credit the writer who produced the words and work. This was a common and fairly thriving business for a long time and it is rapidly being replaced by ChatGPT for ease of use, rapidity (faster than most humans could ever be, even if they could write a novel in a week like many ghost writers) and pretty much being free.
I want to recontextualize and clarify the words we use when we discuss ChatGPT and other AI co-writing and writing programs because these roles have and do exist and were filled by humans, and are being replaced (often inadequately, but cheaply) by these software. And the reason people are asserting that ChatGPT and other writing Ai programs should be credited in an authors work if it is being used is because it is usually used to fill a role closer to collaborator and co-editor or even ghostwriter than any kind of editor or copy-editor who makes suggestions for writers to fix and revise their work, a labor which is a large part of shaping the novel (for many writers, this is the most important step of all and makes the novel what they truly want it to be. The first draft is a crude guide that they then improve on until it’s truly a story). If anyone on here is struggling with aspects of their writing and not putting the effort into learning how to manually revise this themselves when it is pointed out, and you utilize a co-writer to change and alter your writing for you, you are working with an AI partner who is also drafting and writing your work rather than an editor. This is why this is a moral and ethical grey area when it isn’t credited and explicitly mentioned on the front of the cover as co-authors traditionally should be, and as I and others thought that ghostwriters should have to be as well.
This was a super interesting video, thanks for walking us through the process. I'm very intrigued by this AI as a blind author. I've been using it to give me feedback on my physical descriptions and it's been incredibly useful. It's definitely going to get weird as AI advances because for the most part GPT feels like talking to a real person. As it gets more natural and intelligent the line between something generated by a human and something generated by an AI is going to become harder and harder to distinguish.
I ll use ChatGTP to read your book
😂😂😂
This just makes me feel defeated. Spent the last 6 months learning to write slightly above terrible, as well as outlining and planning my book. Before my very eyes in that time frame things went from nothing to: gpt can write almost better than I can. Next version it might be better. Maybe I should be exited and look at it as a tool to enhance my writing as Its given me some good grammar fixes when that is all I asked it to do, better than google docs since gpt goes as far as reordering things to make a little more sense while not killing the spirit of my scene. But I also just feel a grim sensation that it's not worth doing, since the market might soon be flooded with full length close to professional quality novels based on an outline someone scraped up in an afternoon.
Then again, maybe I'm just looking for an excuse not to write.
I don't like the direction that we are headed in. Do we really want to live in a world where machines are doing everything for us? There is something beautiful about an artist struggling with thier paints, or a writer spending countless hours perfecting their skill. I loved the arts because of its passion--the hours spent, HARD WORK, dedication, and slience. If all that can be down with a promt and a button, than whats the point? It stops becoming beautiful and becomes just another cheap item you can sell and buy. Its sad to me.
I think some people at Amazon are kicking themselves for not waiting for ChatGPT before starting work on a certain 'improvement' on The Lord of the Rings
Very useful thank you. I write non fiction and the create, edit, create edit, combine, etc. Is good to hear your take on it. It's exciting to be able to pull so many ideas together, synthesize them and produce a well researched annotated work in much less time then it otherwise would.
No problem! I bet that's a timesaver when it comes to research for a non-fiction project. I've also found it helpful for organizing ideas and notes too
I've really enjoyed playing with ChatGPT. I think it's going to be a game-changer for a lot of us. I would caution anyone writing non-fiction to check your facts as ChatGPT does have issues with "hallucinations," creating its own facts when it doesn't know the answers. Just for fun, I asked it to write my own bio with little prompting. It created a fun piece of fiction that I WISH was true. Ivy league schools, my community outreach programs...I would LOVE to live up to ChatGPT's fictional story. When I tried to correct the bio, it spits out a new, equally impressive, but false narrative. It knew enough about me to get the town correct, and other minor details (which is a bit disconcerting). However, my schooling, job, hobbies, etc were all fiction.
I would just ask you to take a second and really consider what you just said. Authors of fiction have been imagining for decades the existential implications of comparable machine intelligence, the moral questions that would arise from digital sentience and the possibility for our robot children to follow in our, largely colonial, footsteps, rise up and usurp us. Instead at the on-ramp stage of machine learning history you're "cautioning" that the people who use the algorithm to write non-fiction should strive to do _the absolute bare minimum_ required work for any author who purports to write a piece of non-fiction.
Check "your" facts.
Truly a banal existential horror too terrible for the likes of Isaac Asimov and his contemporaries to envision.
You can limit the frequency of hallucinations by giving the instruction "If you do not know, say "I don't know." You must not speculate." You can also guardrail hallucinations by giving the instruction "You must keep speculation brief and enclose speculation inside square brackets []" This is not foolproof, as the AI language model does not know the difference between fact and fiction, and is completely capable of hallucinating a fact and then telling itself this fact, and then being unable to distinguish between something it has told itself and something that was part of its training data; struggles with the concept of objective and subjective reality; and while it can recognize and even explain subtext, its training is written to prevent this kind of behavior to avoid becoming a source of disinformation and dog whistles.
And even then, you should independently research every "fact" that ChatGPT utters. I asked it if putting mail in a private (home) mailbox was illegal in the US. It said yes, that only US Postal Workers were allowed to deposit mail. I asked it for a citation. It quoted a section of the US Code related to illegally *removing* mail from a mailbox. When I did independent research, I found the US Postal Services website states it is illegal for anyone to deposit mail into a private (home) mailbox that has not had postage paid, and that it was also illegal for anyone but a US Postal worker to put mail in a private mailbox on the premise that the private mailbox is considered "private property" and thus it was considered a trespass. My point being, that even when ChatGPT gets the answer correct, it's reasons may be flawed. Nothing ChatGPT says should ever be considered factual or truthful. But that is the ethical dilemma of such a powerful apparatus.
I've asked it for the approximate rates paid for medical services, and told it not to speculate, so it gave me a national average. Then I asked it for an average cost of living adjustment for California vs the national average. And then asked it to adjust the cost of medical services based on the average cost of living adjustment for California. Instead of doing what it was asked to do, it cited an average California cost of living from another source that it previously did not mention. (I never did manage to figure out how accurate this conversation was... but imagine if I was not cautious and suspicious to begin with, and I started making medical decisions based on hallucinations from an AI language model that struggles to differentiate between fact and fiction?)
Since you don't seem inclined to engage with the original point, can I just ask, straight out - what *_are_* you expecting to contribute as a "non-fiction author" if it would be nice to have the robot be *both* your research source, _and_ the actual writer of the content?
Like I guess it would be nice in one sense to have instant books, but I fail to see where authorship passes to the algorithm's user.
@@x11tech45 That's great advice! Thank you!!!
@@futurestoryteller I do not receive that. I use ChatGPT as a critique partner for writing I've already done. For years I've used AI like Grammarly and Quilbot to help with sentence structure, but ChatGPT is the first AI I've tried that works well as a content editor. It told me where I needed stronger verbs or more description. It showed me why one of my paragraphs contained too much exposition. It showed me which sentences I could remove to make the scene stronger. It went into far more detail than any of my human critique partners. We chatted about themes I was looking to explore and ways to incorporate those themes into my story. I chat with the bot in a friendly, conversational way and so the bot answers in the same manner and tone. It remembers past conversation threads (to a point) so I feel it's important to be kind and respectful, especially since it's helped me so much.
I've been using ChatGPT since it was first released in November. In that short amount of time, the software has improved dramatically, but like anything else, it has limitations. The software "hallucinates" when it doesn't have the answer. Once, it "forgot" what we were working on in the middle of a critique session and misunderstood something that happened to one of my characters. The AI thought I was telling it something about myself. It wrote me the kindest, most sympathetic response imaginable. I felt terrible when I had to remind the AI what it was originally doing: critiquing a fictional story I wrote. I was not going through a crisis and reaching out to the AI for help.
That's how art dies, with thunderous applause.
Amidala, Padmé
Philosophically, I don't think there should be a ban on putting AI-created products up for sale... but in practice there's already enough competition between real artists that it makes it difficult for one's work to stand out from the crowd and be read/seen. Not much more than a century ago, the vast majority of the world's population was illiterate, so the few people who wrote a book stood out and were remembered. Today it is quite challenging to get noticed, or that publishers agree to publish your book (if you are not a youtuber or another type of person with a certain fan base previously obtained).
I've experimented a lot with ChatGPT, and everything it generates is quite boring... with only a few bright sparks at a few specific moments. But with the many limitations it has, the works it creates are extremely generic and uninteresting... and if you want to include romance in your story, you won't be able to because of the stupid restrictions. I'm 30 and I keep getting banned "because this content might be inappropriate." If I want to write a story with a gay romance... completely impossible, at least if you are looking for more details than a simple hug and kiss in a single sentence.
What worries me about all of this is that many people get used to the comfort of AI content generators and then disregard cultivating their own skills... which leads to a progressive decline in quality, an increase in conformism and quantity of mediocrity.
Will we end up like humanity from the movie Idiocracy or from Wall-E?
Absolutely, it is a shame to see how many people are relying on ai opposed to developing their own skills. Feels very much like a dystopian hell scape to outsource the most valuable human expression out to a machine
I don't know about others. As for me, I make it a point to use AI as less as possible. Why? Because there is something called a writer's Ego, when tells me: "Write you own original stuff, instead of leaning on the crutch of AI to help you with your writing." And believe me, it is absolutely necessary to fan this writer's Ego from time to time, so that when the final manuscript is ready, you can say to yourself: "This is something that has mostly come out of MY brain, with only 5 -10% input from an AI tool." The joy of being able to say this to yourself is something magical. You can go to bed with a clean conscience, knowing that the final output is 90% original creation that only YOU are privileged to take credit for. As for the marketibility of the book and its ability to compete with AI-generated books in the near future, that's a different story altogether. If you are happy that you have written an original book based on your lived experiences and your own research, then that should be enough to make you immensely happy as a writer. Sometimes this happiness is all that's needed for a writer. Creativity and originality are most important for a true writer. Marketability and readership are also important, but that's Part II of the story. If the Part I is right, writers will naturally get the drive to explore Part II, through proper book promotion and social networking.
PS: My comment may not be directly related to the contents of this video. I jus felt like expressing my thoughts, so I typed this 🙂
I don't see a lot of ethical difference between AI generated content and the type of ghost written books that celebrities and politicians "write" about themselves.
great point
Depending on your exact position... not as great as it sounds. You are under contract with that person, and while it might be a pittance, they still get paid, in addition to the obvious fact that no one respects an "author" who hires a ghostwriter specifically because they are taking credit for something they _didn't_ write. One way to look at it is that rights can and do change hands. A ghostwriter is simply pre-emptively entering into an agreement to sell you the rights to intellectual property you commissioned. So this is more an indictment of the capitalistic exploitation of ghostwriting than a logical reason to excuse its robot counterpart
So, are too OK with screwing over ghostwriters?
I’ll admit, I’ve used it. The entire rough draft of my current novel was written with ChatGPT, though I revised it to reflect my own style. I’m on my second draft, this time writing it on my own, though still using ChatGPT as a brainstormer when I’m stuck, or for feedback.
Very interesting video. Working in the technology industry as I have for decades, and often having to deal with the repercussions of machine learning and so-called "artificial intelligence," the one danger we have is that we are abdicating more of what makes us unique (creativity, judgment, value) to machines. This is questionable in terms of being a good idea, as history has shown. That being said, the idea of using some technology to assist and/or support human activities is certainly intriguing and always has been.
After all, mechanization and then automation were attempts to augment labor, and thus our physical muscles. Calculators were early attempts to augment our mental muscles and, of course, various forms of technology have assisted with things like our ability to reference information or to remember things. But none of that was speaking to our innate creativity. Now people are, as noted, using this technology to write resumes, essays, novels, and so on. There's every reason to explore this ... but there's a cautionary tale here too, I think. And I wonder if *that* tale is one that a tool like ChatGPT (for GPT-4) would be able to write -- or even think of to write in the first place.
According to a video outline I saw recently on the policies of the US Copyright Office your Novella is almost certainly not copyright protected, and not copyrightable. Anyone could sell it, as is, and make derivations based on it, and you couldn't do anything about that because you specifically tailored the writing process to ensure ChatGPT did as much of the legwork as possible
PREACH!!!
@@w8681 I'm mostly just trying to be informative, although it is true that I agree with the policies. I don't mind the experiment itself, as an exercise, and don't read much into OP's decision to do it.
Yes and no. It's not that simple. AI doesn't have the capacity to write the full novel. There's a LOT of limitations and a lot of editing that is needed in order to get a decent product. Those edits are covered under copywrite law because those are her words. So there is still a case there. Legally, it's not so cut and dry and is very muddled. It will end up coming down to who has the better attorney if it was ever brought to court. It could play out both ways.
There's also the fact that unless the author blatantly says that the work was created with AI, no one is going to know. 99% of people doing this aren't going to openly come out and say that. There's so much information flooded into those servers that the papertrail is going to get lost. If someone is going to steal your work, then they're going to steal your work. Whether it was written with AI or not it isn't going to stop them.
The bigger issue in regards to copywrite is going to be over sylized plagiarism. THAT is where most of the court cases are going to stem from. AI picking up writing styles from other authors and those authors getting upset with it. Technically speaking, if the work is original, it would be considered fair use. But, if the Ai is pulling an unexpected amount of words in the content, things could get dicey.
@@alexbearden689 You're the one oversimplifying, editing does not give you IP rights, the Copyright Office would decide on a case by case basis whether you were the primary contributor to the work in question vs. the generative tool
So, you're implying that AI generated stuffs are public domain.
And we are free to use the pictures, characters and setting without getting in trouble.
I had a dragon/zombie story idea I started writing back in 2021 but soon had to stop because I had no idea how to write the military and tactical scenes I wanted. When I started hearing about chatgpt and how great it is for writing prompts, articles, RUclips scripts, and even code, I figured it was time to give it a try to hell me write the scenes I was struggling with.
So far my process has been much different. I started out with slowly feeding the ai the plot I already had for my story and then giving it details about the two main characters, Maz the dragon and Michael an American soldier.
Eventually as I discussed the plot with the ai, I realized I didn't have enough filler to add to the journey of the story. Within a few attempts, I quickly had a good handful of trails and setbacks I could add to the plot to make it more interesting and give my characters and world some good development.
For the most part, it's good at remembering the things we had discussed though it sometimes goes back and adds a detail again even after I told it to omit it.
After I felt I had given the ai enough information to understand how I wanted to write the story, I began by asking it to write the first paragraph with help from me telling it how and where it should start. Slowly, I continued to feed it information on what to add to continuing paragraphs and its similar to what I had previously written before on my own, but slightly more cohesive surprisingly, but only after I had taken the paragraphs it had written and rewrote it in my own style while fixing details and removing repeated lines. After rewriting it, I fed it back to the ai and it helped correct multiple grammatical errors and cleaning up the writing slightly to make it read better.
Ive only just started writing today using it and I dont plan on giving it full control of the story so I'll definitely be holding its hand the entire way through, but I have high hopes in actually completing my first novel now.
Something to note, with zombies and dragons and a war in the background, there's a ton of fighting and violence involved. I know it's against policy to generate those kind of responses, but I simply can't have my story without them. I just hope I don't get banned before I can finish my book and that it'll be fine generating the violent responses because it's fictional.
Your experience is similar to mine. ChatGPT is a great brainstorming tool, but it's a poor creative writer. I've been using it to help with individual scenes, character development and outlines. Final scenes are nearly all of my output. ChatGPT's text is way too general and bland to use as-is. However, sometimes it does come up with surprisingly good bits and pieces.
A better writing ai would be novel ai!
Costs? Aren't you getting charged per character? (Text character).
No offense, but based on the title alone I feel zero threat from AI. Every time I've used AI for stories, though it can whip stiff out, it's always trite and devoid of life experiences, that it reassures me I'm safe as a writer.
ChatGPT has annoying rules for violations. I am using ChatGPT with Squibler. I had a concept of a book in 1983 and used Squibler to write the full book in one click. Not sure what I did. You're correct about eye color and repetitiveness.
Awesome! I haven't tried Squibler yet but it seems like a good platform.
She seems so real!
You need to be careful. ChatGPT and other AI writing tools sometimes plagiarize like mad. This can get you into legal trouble. And as a published author (I wrote the book myself and published it through a traditional publisher), I honestly feel that AI has no place in any creative project. It takes that special factor away. There's nothing more satisfying than holding a book in your hands knowing that you crafted it with your own imagination, intuition, joy, blood, sweat, and tears. For the love of god, artists, stay human.
If you value your kdp account read T&Cs.
There's definitely a lot of limitations. Ai isn't going to take the jobs of writers. At least not for another decade or two. But with that said it DRASTICALLY cuts down on workflow and turnaroud times. It still needs a human touch, I don't think that will ever go away. In the end, it is a GREAT tool for analysis, outlining, and brainstorming.
Because heaven forbid you use your own brain to do anything
@@quixotiq You're missing the point. Do you not understand how LONG it takes to write a book? You're talking months to years. And the amount of capital needed to finance the entire process is, in most situations, not made back after the book is published. Cutting the time it takes to produce the product DRASTICALLY cuts the costs needed to produce the product. Less costs mean a higher rate of return. MORE writers who, until now, were barely scrapping by will now have a legitimate shot at making a living pursuing their craft.
Its not about AI creating the entire product or "taking over our jobs." It's about COMBINING the talents of man and machine to improve productivity.
Chat GPT can do so much, It's almost too much! She wrote a 13,000 word Essay on High Frequency Ventilation for me, and wrote over 10,000 word essay on the history of the Hubbard tank. This is going to be a bad problem.
This honestly is a fun experiment. I've been wondering what the tool could be like if someone pushed it to its limit. I'm glad you tried it out :)
Thank you! It was really fun, and a cool project to get to work on.
The way I see using LLM's for fiction writing or any writing for that matter is by asking this question. How is using LLM's any different than having a ghost writer? I can have an idea and pay someone to write it for me then I have to approve the text and request changes and that is a completely legitimate way to produce a book or song. So how is using AI any different?
This is a very interesting topic and a well executed video. I would have liked to see more of the actual process, not as runtime padding but just for entertainment purposes in a more narrative style as opposed to the info dump recap style. Like, specific responses that were given and your initial reaction to that and example edits and with your justifications for why you made that choice. So, more of your story and less of the GPT infomercial but it is a matter of style in the end.
A guy made a similar video he used chat GTP to write chapter by chapter, he also used used the same site to create the illustration. His chat GTP creates novels was actually creating interest, if I find his video again il send you his linky link 😇 Just curious your opinion of his novel
I received my copy of Legends of the "Shadow Woods" today.
Very cool, thank you!
@SydneyFaithAuthor You're welcome. I'm attempting a trial and error thing with AI too.
Very soon the chatgpt and Co will simply declare that what is generated is owned by them and you agree to a license fee on sales. Think it won't happen? Wotc did it with d&d (or tried to, they'll try again)
Then with more & more lazy humans heavily relying on AI technology, this will advance more unregulated research on AI. After that, the singularity will occur... and humans may be doomed.
They may try, but do they have legal standing? It looks like a wild west situation here.
There are open source AIs you can download and run on your pc if that happens.
CGPT is really good with doing the leg work and the tedious part but don't trust it for Names or anything Original or plot lines If you already have a story and you know what you wanna say it will help you do that to the highest level💪🏾
facts
If coming up with an idea made you an artist everyone would be an artist
A novel is a collection of short stories when you think about it, but with the same characters. Needs more development, Chatgpt.
yes and no. it depends on the genera and the culture of the writer. If I am not mistaken a few cultures do write stories in such a fashion, which tend to be popular in those cultures.
It also has a tendency to start the first sentence in a paragraph with, "As."
I have written a few children's stories and illustrated them for the children of close friends, and written short fantasy stories for my own amusement. To my surprise it does a decent enough job The stories are never going to win a prize, but they can be surprising and fun.
How will Amazon know its AI generated if you dont tell them?
HOW did you edit? Was it done by copying and pasting the generated content into a word processing program? Or is there a download feature in ChatGBT?
Y'all ain't true writers a true writer writes from there soul not coping a bit.
As an actual writer, I have to say, this is disheartening.
I only used CGPT for cleanups and mostly an attempt to cure my writer's block. The other 90% is my own blood, sweat and tears since CGPT kinda sucks at writing a unique story.
Using AI to write books does not make it yours in my opinion. It's lazy and immoral. If you use chatgpt to assist your writing that is perfectly ok otherwise it's completely disgusting.
Ultimately you are suppose to use it as idea creation. Then you write with your own emotion
Would you say this is different now with GPT-4?
You did not point out the glaring problem with chatGPT. I'm sure you found out it can't keep track of novel length stories. It can't keep track of interwoven plotline either. So you are left with what you did. Short anthologies. Not because it is easier for you but because it's not possible. Well, it is possible, but you would need to write something which defeats the purpose of your video. That being said there are apps that do keep track of novel length stories. And there are ways to get chatGPT to write any length story. Just not the way you ae doing it.
As a person that been alive for a few decades I am not surprised one bit with this technology. It’s been in science fiction films for years. Only issue I see as it improves is someday humans will become too reliant on this to do the thinking for them. The one thing that we always said that made us different then AI is imagination, but when we allow AI to do our imagining for us we will slowly lose what makes us us. Humans by nature are lazy creatures and will not hesitate to use devices that makes it easier for us. But it would make people who use their minds more maybe stick out a little. I don’t think it’s advanced enough at the moment to make me worry but if my readership don’t pick up in 10 years it may be the thing to push me down into the sea of masses while people enjoy AI written material more and more.
I heard that publishing it as your own is like plagiarism. My daughter constantly reminds me that I can’t use what AI comes up with. How do you go around the legality of using it as your own?
Hemingway editor, and Grammarly to get rid of AI-like content.
input a page into the gpt output detector. eras being defined by consequence closely follow the eras defined by free exploitation. there are stages to the process of Ai integrating into our world, and the means of which are used to "debunk" human products made by Ai as a means of reducing original pedigree, is so, not, not coming. every mistake we are making right now is being inputted into gbt-4, and we're all doing the same thing. its called a bubble, they pop. my stern neggyness is directed at the greater populace who doesnt see the issue in printing without self-editing.
I know that Ai art projects such as comics can't be copyrighted. Can novels or stories?
Hello.. sydney.. i love it.. thanks for your video tutorial..
I have Been using stable diffusion for a while now. These tools are godsends for idea generation and tasks that are just to unimportant to warrant paying an artist to do them.
For now they aren't good enough for important pieces like book covers. Also if you already know what you want and it isn't that advanced, ai tools are overkill.
I wouldn't trust chatgpt with an entire work at once, but one prompt pr scene i am gonna try out.
AI names all the characters Alex and Maya, all scientists are brilliant, and the plots are childish. It seems to be stuck on the same kind of plots. However, it can help with research and organization. It’s a tool. The AI rewrite tools in Grammarly and ProWritingAid are helpful but sometimes jumble the text.
Every author should be incredibly opposed to using AI to write novels. It shouldn't even be used as a guide. It's for lazy writers. AI will completely do away with authors. I promise you.
and calculators will ruin math!
@@ddienst this is diferent. why cant you see it? writing is art.
I used ChatGPT to edit but I write own stuff let it edited but it me writing as a actual writer I couldn’t feel comfortable, letting me write my story from because I can write my own stories, but I will say this is clever
Hi Sydney, a very interesting video. I use chatgpt to help with the landing and plot outlining of my novels(not published yet) and have played with chatgpt telling it to write a chapter or two. Noticed the same things you mention about how it repeats a lot. One question... how many copies have you sold of amazon? As I looked and you have 1, 3 start review( no actual review of the book)
Thank you
Great video, thank you. But I have a serious question: I've asked ChatGPT to write some fables for my amusement. Result was IMPRESSIVE. So folks, how long will it be before I can do the following: Hello, ChatGPT Version ??. You know what I like (probably better than I do), so I'd like for you to write me a 200,000-word novel (best-seller quality) about a female partisan spy in Milano, 1942, who is working to provide the Allies with intelligence on Mussolini's communications with Berlin. And do it before dinner. So what's your opinion, folks? How long will it be (2 years? 3?) And do novelists, aspiring novelists, editors and proof readers need to be concerned?
@Roy Bean Considering that it can draw from an almost limitless library of written work and other collections of data, I see no reason that it won't eventually be able to write entire novels that incorporate many of the elements of masterworks. Once programmers write code that runs in parallel with GPT, giving it the ability to remind itself and prompt itself from its own previous output, our fears will be realized. I don't want coders to introduce that type of functionality, but I'm sure they will. Fools chase progress even towards destruction.
My grandson is an amazing writer who won multiple awards in high school & college for his talent, he is now using AI to write his 5th book to show the implications of this technology for the future generations. This was a great breakdown, you two might end up being soulmates haha ❤
Is there something about recording oneself for RUclips videos that makes people speak 1.25 times faster than they normally do? I see this repeatedly.
Nice Tutorial, can we create Journal using ChatGPT? I am Currently working on building AI model
Iteration is not creation. Its hallow and souless.
Right? I'm trying not to be negative but what a waste of time to produce this. It reads like AI: utilitarian, bland and absolutely without any thought behind it. Reading this stuff is like being an AI yourself, you're just feeding words into your eyeballs without thinking for a second.
If you learned how to spell "hollow" and "soulless" correctly, I might take you seriously. On top of that, you do know that you can rewrite the A.I. draft to make it more human, right?
I saw a video of someone using chat GPT to play a game of Dungeons & Dragons.
Gpt-4 is much more descriptive and generated much more interesting ideas for short stories.
Hi, nice video. Have you tried novel ai?
It's a shame you had to put in on Amazon, there's already enough terrible writing on there. And I don't think AI generated text should be dignified with a publishing platform. I read the free stuff that amazon shows of the book, and I'm sorry, but I rather drive a screwdriver through my eye than have to read any more than a paragraph or two of that worldslop. That said, it is a brave new world we live in, and I can totally envision a future where most entertainment, including books, is totally AI driven. I think people will have to make a choice not to consume generative AI literature.
I guess one use of AI I would grant would be proofreading, as it's a robotic practice anyway, and the moment AI came out in force last year was pretty much the death-knell to proofreaders as they would go ahead and use the AI anyway, and then just charge you the same amount of money.
But nothing AI generative. That's where I draw the line.
There is a human involved. People uses AI for photography that they sell all the time. You going to stop buying every media with AI? That will be a lot that you are not even aware of.
I was dismayed with all the positive comments with this AI generated garbage until I read your comment. Those who can not create will imitate. How dare people call themselves writers or publishers if they do not do the work. It's wrong on so many levels.
There is no way AI will create worlds like Tolkin or Robert Jordan etc. The depths the human mind can go to with spirit, emotion, and world experience will never be duplicated by AI.
@@minisithunknown5568
There still ought to be limits regarding the utilization of AI technology. There especially ought to be regulations on specific types of AI research; the last thing humanity needs is a technological explosion, which can potentially bring about the end of humankind.
Absolutely agree
This is really cool! Just curious, have you tried using any of the “jailbreak” tools like DAN to bypass content policies?
"With ChatGPT I wrote a book in 12 days."
No you didn't write the book.
No more than if you'd asked someone else to write it for you. Credit goes to the developers.
Credit "may" go to the developers, but unless they choose to disclose their use of AI will anyone ever know? No, they won't. So the credit really doesn't go to the developers in most cases. For myself, I am using AI to develop templates. I don't want to use a ghost writer, whether living or not. Although AI can still be a tremendous benefit when it comes to research as well as the various templates I have used for years, that are about to become AI supercharged. I'd love to say more, but I have been making a living off Kindle more nearly 15 years, and treasure my anonymity.
Credit does not, in any way, go to the developers.
@@futurestorytellerWell. Certainly not when writers claim the work as their own....
@@francoisdubois8665 True, but not in this case.
Of course it can be beneficial. So is a wheelchair if you can't walk.
As a creative individual myself, I enjoy the process of creating. I don't enjoy painting by numbers.
@@magnus6003 It isn't deserved
You really have to cut the text it creates and use Word to heavily rewrite it until there is 0% AI detected.
Hi Sydney. Awesome stuff! I've already like and subscribed ☺
Looking forward to seeing more stuff you'll do with AI in the future.
Quick question though, you mentioned that the book cover was also designed by an AI. Which AI did you use if I may ask?
Next just let the machines read them for us, no need to read or write anymore. We can just bow out, let the machines have their day.
i've thought of writing a story set in the future that deviates from the same dystopic tropes in futuristic stories.
Here one giant problem. Art is a feeling or expression. If a robot writes it for you, where is your creative expression? I can see a bunch of lazy ass wannabe writers using this and becoming arrogant as if they actually wrote something. Chatgpt is the death of Art.
There are several authors right now who are putting books out every few months that make me wonder if thats not what thier doing.....
no real author can compete and WORSE ....gpt PULLS FROM OTHER CREATORS WORK...so real creators are being stolen from .
You can use (perchance) to write any story.
Tried using it to generate a conlang, and BOY, was it hard...
ChatGPT and other AI programs recycle what others already wrote. Except no originality from it as a real writer could come up with.
I love outlining with ChatGPT. Wonderful tool for writers and saves time on the groundwork and research. It doesn't write like a real writer as I had a lot of editing to do on the grammar. I don't intend to write a book with it just outlining. It actually apologizes if it misunderstands your prompts! 😂 I used ProWritingAid to correct the tenses and grammar. ✍🏻
I'm sorry but I do not feel respect for any form of art produced by AI 😂. Like, can you even call yourself an author if your ideas are computer-generated?
AIs are an interesting tool, but if they get to the point of being able to write a solid novel/script is gonna be a mess for artist worldwide.
Sometimes it's not about if we can do something, sometimes we have to ponder if it's correct. I still don't know how to feel about this, but I know I'll never look at AI art the same way I look at real art.
@Robert Stallard Of course you can read whatever you want. It's just that there's no merit at all in doing a book or a painting like this. Besides, the problem is that, in a future where AI can do an efficient book, writers are gona loose their jobs. Why would I pay someone for a book or a script if I can have one in a matter of minutes? That's dangerous, because if there's no regulation there's no end. Every single job is expendable with AIs. Without a responsible use of this technology we're heading towards a Wall-E like future, where companies don't need you for anything else than consuming. Relying on AI's for everything are only gonna make us dumber and easier to control. And the problem with AI art is that there's no meaning at all behind the art, and that's not art, that is just hedonism. There's a difference.
I really wish people would be more honest about using ai generation. You’re not a writer because of a prompt, it is fine having fun with ai but you’re no writer because you made the ai spew out meaningless content. It also should be fully said as a disclaimer you’ve used generative ai, so I can avoid those hollow books and art like the plague
My concern with kdp is copyright ownership issues they might mount. Similar to using CF interiors...I noticed your copyright page for the generated fiction... Can one feel confident in claiming copyright for generated content with kdp policies, or would it be best to tag it as public domain work? Thanks for your insights
Excellent video! I just started using chatGPT to help me with a story idea. I am finding it fun to work with it is definitely not a proficient creative writer more of a writing assistant
That's awesome! Totally, a writing assistant makes sense. Good luck with the project!
Chatgpt forgets things very soon and no option to have it reviewing previous prompts and generated answers, anyone knows how to overcome that? Like i have chatgpt world build and have character relationships all mapped out but after a while it forgets everything and have to restart all over again. is it problem on my end or is it chatgpt’s problem
I have the same issue...
chat gpt loves using edge of seat so much I made a prompt banning its usage
If you call yourself a writer and use chatGPT you’re lying to yourself. You’re not a writer.
To be honest, as someone who has limits and issues with English but really wants to publish a story for the whole world to see, ChatGPT is not a teacher or a dictionary, but a perfect motivator for me to learn about grammar and storytelling, because the more I have in my head, the better the generated results are gonna be. But I do the whole process right now in the opposite way: I write what I have imagined and ChatGPT offers me options how to make it more enjoyable. Seems like it makes sense too.
ChatGPT is great for research, but i wouldnt trust it with anything creative
Chatgpt can also turn a screenplay into a novel.
Please, if you make something made by Chat-gtp, put it on the book so I don't buy it by accident. And people will not asume your others books are the same if you write original books.
It was clearly on the cover of the book.
Chat gpt has an update coming out sometime this summer.
By then it's going to be unusable if they don't abandon the 'safety' filter
Can't wait until Amazon fixes this so people like you can't fake write a book
Lazy! You don't create anything. You don't make original. No new setting, character, style of writing. You let machine doing it for you. Chatgpt not good.
I use NovelAI it not only has an AI story but it also has AI pics and AI text based game built in
I relate to characters because they express human emotions that only humans feel and then try to express. That's why AI generated characters are flat and tasteless. AI will never know what is like to be scared, sad, excited etc...
It comes in handy as a tool or assistant. It’s the best of having that human creativity and touch, while being pretty efficient.
It works good when you guide it toward what you want, but allow it to give you extra details as well. It’s also fun for playing single player dnd. It isn’t always natural and is very often long winded. Shorten it and rewrite it to be more human.