The problem with this approach is that it will, at best, churn out formulaic and derivative product. All fiction relies on some degree of formula, but good fict

The problem with this approach is that it will, at best, churn out formulaic and derivative product. All fiction relies on some degree of formula, but good fiction is not formulaic. Good fiction breaks new ground, finds new twists on old tropes, invents new tropes outright, or invents new worlds and new personas in breakthrough ways. Good fiction, like all good art, is inherently creative. It creates what didn't exist before. While all art has its influences, its processes, its references, and its tropes, it is not a simple recombination of these things. Again, I'm not saying a program will never turn out great, or even decent, fiction. But I think that day is far off. In the interim, we already have what could be classified as -- albeit in a very loose sense of the word -- cooperative fiction by man-machine collaborations. Writers use programs like Final Draft and Scrivener to help them keep track of characters and plot points, notes, formats, outlines, etc. It's not a huge stretch to imagine future iterations of these programs that offer algorithmically-guided notes on the structure, settings, consistencies and inconsistencies, etc., as the author is writing or editing. In the same way that a word processor runs automatic spell check, these programs might someday run automatic plot check (Imagine some dystopian, futuristic version of Clippy: "It looks like you're writing a science fiction novel; do you want some structural templates?")