What Do You Think Of AI?

I would like to begin with an earnest reply to this debate. I pray my readers and others who review my thoughts here do not condemn my opinion. I also maintain that my perspectives on the matter do not affect the scope of my ability to compose the written word.

I do not fear, question or criticize the impact of AI on creative industries. I genuinely believe in the autonomy and agency of all to leverage a tool like artificial intelligence. Ranchers and breeders faced the inevitability of automobiles. Electricity revolutionized technology entirely, redefining how mechanical work operates. Similarly, the Internet overhauled communications around the globe.

No one can stop it, and I think this writer shows artistic excellence in producing an award-winning book, even with the help of AI.

Innovation versus Imitation

Now, especially on a blogging site, do I see the following opinion: I don't support the use of AI for generating content and earning rewards. Agreed, my good reader, fear not. However, just as butter might be made with the assistance of an analog churn, production might also benefit from an industrial, electric machine as well. Needless to say, I remain uninformed on the methods of churning butter.

I attempt to parallel this very situation. I would not stand behind anyone proclaiming to be a writer, as they type in prompts to Gemini (formerly Google Bard) or Notion AI along the lines of: "Write me a short story like Stephen King or Philip Pullman."

This is mere imitation, which I find very unbecoming. Innovation looks different.

We cannot all afford credentialed writing staff for revisions, editing, and proofreading. For everything else, a virtual assistant could help. In fact, if the supply of the writing to manipulate consists of your own invention, I do not particularly see a problem.

AI-Free or Assisted by AI?

I am not against Rie Kudan's methods. I do not subscribe to them, however. I am the originator, editor and for all royalties, earnings or support's sake, the creator of written content published from this platform.

I admittedly am a novice novelist, and do leverage different resources to guide my writing process. Rest assured, with the supportive messages of my regular readers, vote value from my delegators and an indomitable will, a novel will result from my efforts.

But what do you think of the author's opinion?

“I plan to continue to profit from the use of AI in the writing of my novels, while letting my creativity express itself to the fullest."
Rie Kudan

And what of the one judge's statements?

“It seems that the story that Rie Kudan’s award-winning work was written using generative AI is misunderstood… If you read it, you will see that the generative AI was mentioned in the work.”

“There will be problems with that kind of usage in the future, but that is not the case with ‘Tokyo Sympathy Tower.’”

I'm not looking to enter any Japanese contests, but intolerance will not assure quality. A lack of artificial intelligence does not equate to commendable accomplishment, either. Only those committed to an honest appraisal of these arts should judge, and for me, assistance from AI does not constitute discrimination.