3 ms·
It shouldn't matter which tools were used to write a story, just whether it's a good story or not. However, how would any publisher assess such a flood of subm
by kleiba 4y ago
It shouldn't matter which tools were used to write a story, just whether it's a good story or not.
However, how would any publisher assess such a flood of submissions? Use AI to pre-classify stories as good/mediocre/bad?
- forgetfreeman 4y agoThis is incorrect. The absurd extreme of what you are advocating is full automation at which point people do literally nothing but consume content.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- narrator 4y agoThere's already too much entertainment. It's a completely oversaturated market.
- TheCoelacanth 4y agoThat sounds tiring. Can't I get an AI to consume the content for me?
- Retric 4y agoIf the AI stories where good enough they could just stop after finding a few good submissions, but they are all terrible. Or as they say “While rejecting and banning these submissions has been simple, it’s growing at a rate that will necessitate changes.”
- JohnFen 4y agoIt depends on what you want. Personally, what I find valuable about art is that it's communication from another human, so it matters to me. I'd prefer the human-written story even if the machine-written one is technically better. Sort of like how I prefer handcrafted pottery over machine-made pottery, or handcrafted furniture over machine-made furniture even if the machine ones are technically superior.
- LadyCailin 4y agoRequire a non-trivial but affordable deposit to review the submission. Refundable if an actual effort was made whether or not it is accepted. If I just spent the effort to actually write a story, I wouldn’t mind depositing $20 to get someone to review it, with full expectation that I get the money back.