3 ms·

Nobody even started to seriously write books using AI. But at one point there will be AI books on "most read" lists. And a more than one of those will have read

Nobody even started to seriously write books using AI. But at one point there will be AI books on "most read" lists. And a more than one of those will have readership higher than anything by John Scalzi. And he's not bad, I liked what I read of his.

TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago
Plenty of people have been using AI to write books for a couple of years now. The successful ones already knew how to write books - which directly contradicts the standard line about "It's just people who couldn't do it without AI." That's just objectively wrong. There have been some successful spammers who flood Amazon with tens/hundreds/thousands of titles, but that's more of an exercise in technology and marketing than writing.
- scotty79 2mo ago
  Any AI bestsellers you know about yet?
bluefirebrand 2mo ago
You're probably right, and it will be an incredibly sad day when we have completed replaced the human part of creation in our culture with AI creation Might just be final nail in the coffin for our cultural stagnation
- scotty79 2mo ago
  Human literature won't be completely replaced, same way photography and print didn't replace painting. They just outgrew it billion times (in volmue at least) and the humanity is richer for it.
  - latexr 2mo ago
    Humanity is richer because photography outgrew painting? How do you figure? I’m not judging or disagreeing, I’m just interested in the argument. On a utilitarian sense, no doubt a photography is more useful than a painting. But in the artistic/creative sense (what the conversation is about), I’m not sure the case is that clear-cut, hence the question.
    - scotty79 2mo ago
      > But in the artistic/creative sense (what the conversation is about), I’m not sure the case is that clear-cut, hence the question. Art for me is joy (or in wider definition emotion) of the beholders (and the creators). The sum of joy (and other emotions) that people derive from making, sharing and viewing photos manyfold exceeds sum of emotional value that paintings deliver.

TheOtherHobbes 2mo ago

Plenty of people have been using AI to write books for a couple of years now. The successful ones already knew how to write books - which directly contradicts the standard line about "It's just people who couldn't do it without AI." That's just objectively wrong. There have been some successful spammers who flood Amazon with tens/hundreds/thousands of titles, but that's more of an exercise in technology and marketing than writing.

scotty79 2mo ago
Any AI bestsellers you know about yet?

bluefirebrand 2mo ago

You're probably right, and it will be an incredibly sad day when we have completed replaced the human part of creation in our culture with AI creation Might just be final nail in the coffin for our cultural stagnation

scotty79 2mo ago
Human literature won't be completely replaced, same way photography and print didn't replace painting. They just outgrew it billion times (in volmue at least) and the humanity is richer for it.
- latexr 2mo ago
  Humanity is richer because photography outgrew painting? How do you figure? I’m not judging or disagreeing, I’m just interested in the argument. On a utilitarian sense, no doubt a photography is more useful than a painting. But in the artistic/creative sense (what the conversation is about), I’m not sure the case is that clear-cut, hence the question.
  - scotty79 2mo ago
    > But in the artistic/creative sense (what the conversation is about), I’m not sure the case is that clear-cut, hence the question. Art for me is joy (or in wider definition emotion) of the beholders (and the creators). The sum of joy (and other emotions) that people derive from making, sharing and viewing photos manyfold exceeds sum of emotional value that paintings deliver.