6 ms·

Hitting CTRL+F and searching for AI all over the piece, there are 0 mentions. I would have loved to read what a writer thinks of the coming AI takeover in creat

Hitting CTRL+F and searching for AI all over the piece, there are 0 mentions. I would have loved to read what a writer thinks of the coming AI takeover in creative writing. Virtually all the jobs mentioned can already be replaced with AI for a fraction of the cost. One thing is clear from this text: she can definitely write. I wonder what her erotic stories read like even though I'm not exactly the demographic they were aiming for.

SuperHeavy256 1y ago
Not everything needs to be about AI. Not everything should be.
- CalRobert 1y ago
  Ok, but if you’re a horse in the 1920’s it seems prudent to consider automobiles
  - cafard 1y ago
    Given the modus operandi of the AI world, it might be more prudent to consider dogfood factories.
  - vouaobrasil 1y ago
    Horse to automobile is not the same as AI to not using AI.
  - cozzyd 1y ago
    Surely horse world will track this.
dakiol 1y ago
> Virtually all the jobs mentioned can already be replaced with AI for a fraction of the cost. I’m not so sure. First, they are already paying pennies to the writers. Second, who’s gonna write the prompt? The bosses certainly not, so they would hire prompters. Now, you cannot simply hire a prompter with zero experience in copywriting or editing; these people would not accept less than pennies for their work. So you just go ahead and hire people with writing experience. It’s easier. Edit: besides, assuming AI will take over, if you want an original and catchy story, you need to provide a good prompt. I cannot think someone more suitable to provide such prompts than the writers themselves. Is like saying: anyone can create their own app with LLMs. Well, I can tell you my mom or my 21 year old cousin wouldn’t be able to do so (they wouldn’t be able to be more specific than a simple “I want a spotify-like app but in red”. They wouldn’t know what to do with the LLM output, even if it comes as an executable that you just need to drop in your phone). So you need developers here as well.
- cousin_it 1y ago
  > Second, who’s gonna write the prompt? The bosses certainly not, so they would hire prompters. I think AIs will quickly progress to the point where the boss can just tell them to do X, instead of telling the prompter to tell the AI to do X.
  - bix6 1y ago
    The boss doesn’t have time for that.
    - throwaway290 1y ago
      If the boss has the time to task the writer then they also have time to task the LLM
      - bix6 1y ago
        No because the writer can finish everything without any follow up whereas the LLM needs hand holding, re prompting, context, etc.
        throwaway290 1y ago
        All of it seems like technicalities easy to add and wrap in a product that takes one task you would give to an actual writer...
        wwweston 1y ago
        "Model, for the purposes of this prompt, assume you have been developed into an actual writer with skills of expression reflecting the things I the capital holder/agent value and know when I see it but may not be able to articulate in so many words so can't actually insert this prompt. Now, write a good story."
        1y ago
keiferski 1y ago
My prediction is that all "anonymous" writing will be replaced by AI. By anonymous, I mean: copywriting, corporate-style neutral writing, product descriptions, news summaries, headlines, and so on. Anything where the identity of the author is unknown or not important. However, writers that lean into their identity and inject their personality into the writing, use video, and generally have a public brand will probably do fine. The fact is: we live in a video world now, so unless you can latch onto the brand of a larger entity to grow your audience, you're probably going to need to be on camera. (This is basically how many writers are successful on Substack.) Writers will also continue to be needed in fields where there is zero tolerance for errors (say, technical writers at complex manufacturing companies.)
- throwaway290 1y ago
  > we live in a video world now Yeah and in a world where Veo3 exists. Using video is not a panacea. Actually if you post the video on youtube then it is used to train Veo so that you can be replaced... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44070548 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44070548
Tallain 1y ago
For many writers and creative types I've read and talked to, the use of AI for pretty much any reason is equivalent to crossing the picket line. When so many models are trained on illegally-obtained data (libgen, etc.) and provide profit without acknowledgement to the folks whose creative output made said profit possible in the first place, it feels really icky to put it lightly. What's more, the creative process is about pulling something out from inside of you, examining your ideas and yourself, and maybe showing it to the world. Feedback from others, editors or readers or whatever, is a reciprocation of that. Or if you keep it to yourself, you've learned and grown anyway, and have honed your craft for the next time you try it. What reward is there in computer mimicry? How does AI empower this process? From a commercial aspect it all sucks. Creatives are devalued and the creative process is arrested. This isn't new, though. Ever since we started calling entertainment "content," you could see it coming. It's a struggle Hollywood's faced since the studio system, even before. We had the subversives in the Code era, the new wave people, the auteurs, and so on, all fighting that good fight against the business people who spoke only in dollars and cents. So it was, so it shall be. I don't think there will be an AI takeover in creative writing, except for maybe a hiccup where slop content creators chase gold. Already a couple of romance writers accidentally published stories with prompts left in them and have instantly ruined their reputations forever. I think the people interested in reading what a machine wrote are the people interested in making the machine write. Everyone else wants something from a real human.
- wwweston 1y ago
  > From a commercial aspect it all sucks. Creatives are devalued and the creative process is arrested. Don't worry, if we keep it up, we can do this to everyone, all humanity, and finish our centuries long work of making a world that's hard on humans and good for our superorganisms -- business, capital organizations, churches and states that we started on centuries ago. Our technical creations can help us accelerate and complete the process by which we have chosen to make our only possible significance and value in how much we can scramble to control of these, crushing every other human endeavor and the suffering we create and potential joys we torch in meanwhile nothing but the meaningless price of progress.
vouaobrasil 1y ago
> Hitting CTRL+F and searching for AI all over the piece, there are 0 mentions. I would have loved to read what a writer thinks of the coming AI takeover in creative writing. I make a living as a writer and I don't use AI. In fact, I hate AI and I work for an AI-free writing website. There is an audience for it, and we make enough money to support ourselves as well.
wwweston 1y ago
Here's what I think as an amateur writer: * AI fulfills a prompt. "Write me a story" or "write me an article" or "write me song lyrics" will get you a story or an article or song lyrics and that in itself is pretty amazing in itself, but as someone who has tried all of these things at various levels of sophistication, it's pretty clear to me that there's often something missing from these results, and of course there is, because you have to put whatever "something" is in the prompt to have good chances "something" will show up. Do you know what that something is when you conceive the story / article / song lyrics? You might... but you might not, the art might be half in the process you work through to figure out what "something" is, hand in hand with the work of giving it form. I can see how AI can help and have already used it this way, but I've already seen how it will often fail or produce Content™ rather than something that fulfills the full profile implied in the impulse to make the thing. * "a fraction of the cost" is ... speculative to put it charitably. Users aren't exposed to anything remotely like the costs involved right now, the tech is only available at the moment by burning a huge amount of venture / research funding (on top the huge uncompensated labor heists that torching enlightenment copyright bargains represents). The true economics are pretty opaque before you even get deeper questions of like the implications of introducing an external dependency that may not be truly fungible and may represent unknown influences into the thought-level substrate of human culture / experience.

SuperHeavy256 1y ago

Not everything needs to be about AI. Not everything should be.

CalRobert 1y ago
Ok, but if you’re a horse in the 1920’s it seems prudent to consider automobiles
- cafard 1y ago
  Given the modus operandi of the AI world, it might be more prudent to consider dogfood factories.
- vouaobrasil 1y ago
  Horse to automobile is not the same as AI to not using AI.
- cozzyd 1y ago
  Surely horse world will track this.

dakiol 1y ago

> Virtually all the jobs mentioned can already be replaced with AI for a fraction of the cost. I’m not so sure. First, they are already paying pennies to the writers. Second, who’s gonna write the prompt? The bosses certainly not, so they would hire prompters. Now, you cannot simply hire a prompter with zero experience in copywriting or editing; these people would not accept less than pennies for their work. So you just go ahead and hire people with writing experience. It’s easier. Edit: besides, assuming AI will take over, if you want an original and catchy story, you need to provide a good prompt. I cannot think someone more suitable to provide such prompts than the writers themselves. Is like saying: anyone can create their own app with LLMs. Well, I can tell you my mom or my 21 year old cousin wouldn’t be able to do so (they wouldn’t be able to be more specific than a simple “I want a spotify-like app but in red”. They wouldn’t know what to do with the LLM output, even if it comes as an executable that you just need to drop in your phone). So you need developers here as well.

cousin_it 1y ago
> Second, who’s gonna write the prompt? The bosses certainly not, so they would hire prompters. I think AIs will quickly progress to the point where the boss can just tell them to do X, instead of telling the prompter to tell the AI to do X.
- bix6 1y ago
  The boss doesn’t have time for that.
  - throwaway290 1y ago
    If the boss has the time to task the writer then they also have time to task the LLM
    - bix6 1y ago
      No because the writer can finish everything without any follow up whereas the LLM needs hand holding, re prompting, context, etc.
      - throwaway290 1y ago
        All of it seems like technicalities easy to add and wrap in a product that takes one task you would give to an actual writer...
        wwweston 1y ago
        "Model, for the purposes of this prompt, assume you have been developed into an actual writer with skills of expression reflecting the things I the capital holder/agent value and know when I see it but may not be able to articulate in so many words so can't actually insert this prompt. Now, write a good story."
        1y ago

keiferski 1y ago

My prediction is that all "anonymous" writing will be replaced by AI. By anonymous, I mean: copywriting, corporate-style neutral writing, product descriptions, news summaries, headlines, and so on. Anything where the identity of the author is unknown or not important. However, writers that lean into their identity and inject their personality into the writing, use video, and generally have a public brand will probably do fine. The fact is: we live in a video world now, so unless you can latch onto the brand of a larger entity to grow your audience, you're probably going to need to be on camera. (This is basically how many writers are successful on Substack.) Writers will also continue to be needed in fields where there is zero tolerance for errors (say, technical writers at complex manufacturing companies.)

throwaway290 1y ago
> we live in a video world now Yeah and in a world where Veo3 exists. Using video is not a panacea. Actually if you post the video on youtube then it is used to train Veo so that you can be replaced... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44070548 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44070548

Tallain 1y ago

For many writers and creative types I've read and talked to, the use of AI for pretty much any reason is equivalent to crossing the picket line. When so many models are trained on illegally-obtained data (libgen, etc.) and provide profit without acknowledgement to the folks whose creative output made said profit possible in the first place, it feels really icky to put it lightly. What's more, the creative process is about pulling something out from inside of you, examining your ideas and yourself, and maybe showing it to the world. Feedback from others, editors or readers or whatever, is a reciprocation of that. Or if you keep it to yourself, you've learned and grown anyway, and have honed your craft for the next time you try it. What reward is there in computer mimicry? How does AI empower this process? From a commercial aspect it all sucks. Creatives are devalued and the creative process is arrested. This isn't new, though. Ever since we started calling entertainment "content," you could see it coming. It's a struggle Hollywood's faced since the studio system, even before. We had the subversives in the Code era, the new wave people, the auteurs, and so on, all fighting that good fight against the business people who spoke only in dollars and cents. So it was, so it shall be. I don't think there will be an AI takeover in creative writing, except for maybe a hiccup where slop content creators chase gold. Already a couple of romance writers accidentally published stories with prompts left in them and have instantly ruined their reputations forever. I think the people interested in reading what a machine wrote are the people interested in making the machine write. Everyone else wants something from a real human.

wwweston 1y ago
> From a commercial aspect it all sucks. Creatives are devalued and the creative process is arrested. Don't worry, if we keep it up, we can do this to everyone, all humanity, and finish our centuries long work of making a world that's hard on humans and good for our superorganisms -- business, capital organizations, churches and states that we started on centuries ago. Our technical creations can help us accelerate and complete the process by which we have chosen to make our only possible significance and value in how much we can scramble to control of these, crushing every other human endeavor and the suffering we create and potential joys we torch in meanwhile nothing but the meaningless price of progress.

vouaobrasil 1y ago

> Hitting CTRL+F and searching for AI all over the piece, there are 0 mentions. I would have loved to read what a writer thinks of the coming AI takeover in creative writing. I make a living as a writer and I don't use AI. In fact, I hate AI and I work for an AI-free writing website. There is an audience for it, and we make enough money to support ourselves as well.

wwweston 1y ago

Here's what I think as an amateur writer: * AI fulfills a prompt. "Write me a story" or "write me an article" or "write me song lyrics" will get you a story or an article or song lyrics and that in itself is pretty amazing in itself, but as someone who has tried all of these things at various levels of sophistication, it's pretty clear to me that there's often something missing from these results, and of course there is, because you have to put whatever "something" is in the prompt to have good chances "something" will show up. Do you know what that something is when you conceive the story / article / song lyrics? You might... but you might not, the art might be half in the process you work through to figure out what "something" is, hand in hand with the work of giving it form. I can see how AI can help and have already used it this way, but I've already seen how it will often fail or produce Content™ rather than something that fulfills the full profile implied in the impulse to make the thing. * "a fraction of the cost" is ... speculative to put it charitably. Users aren't exposed to anything remotely like the costs involved right now, the tech is only available at the moment by burning a huge amount of venture / research funding (on top the huge uncompensated labor heists that torching enlightenment copyright bargains represents). The true economics are pretty opaque before you even get deeper questions of like the implications of introducing an external dependency that may not be truly fungible and may represent unknown influences into the thought-level substrate of human culture / experience.