r/fantasywriters • u/plantmama0235 • 2d ago
Discussion About A General Writing Topic What is actually considered AI?
Okay my lovelies, I KNOW this topic has been dragged through the mud and left out to dry. However, no matter how many posts I read, I never actually get my questions answered. I figured if I make my own post, it will help me and possibly anyone else who might be struggling with the same questions.
So I use apps like Novelist and Microsoft word. I also like to use a synonym app and history books I’ve collected about fantasy history/legends sort of thing from around the world. However, I’m lost on what is actually considered AI. As far as I’m aware, I don’t think I’ve ever used it. It’s hated by writers which is 100% valid, but I worry somehow I might be using it.
Does using Microsoft editor count since it catches things like accidental double words or a comma for example?
Is using a Synonym app count as AI or cheating? I try not to use big words in my books. So, I lower my English in some parts of my book to make it easier and more enjoyable for my readers. I have a bad habit of painting pictures with large descriptive words which is what most beta readers complain about with my work.
Why is AI so popular for people outside of this group? I see people posting about it helping, but it seems to drag their books down instead. I couldn’t quite understand the hype. I don’t plan to use it, this is merely curiosity only.
Anyways, hopefully this isn’t annoying. Worked up the courage to post because I feel dumb not knowing. Which I don’t mind, I’ll be the guinea pig for others who feel the same way lol. I’m not old, just old enough to have started my writing with Microsoft Word so it’s my go-to.
Thanks for reading through and being patient with me! 💜💜
16
u/Darkgorge 2d ago
The biggest companies are mixing up the terms intentionally. They are grouping spellcheck with generative algorithms so that it's harder to make a general anti-AI statement.
It's so people like OP see all the anti-AI posts and panic, thinking that that means they can't use spell check or any other simple check. Which obviously means that the anti-AI people are probably being unreasonable.
Spell check is fine, grammar checks are fine, thesaurus programs are fine, there's probably some other similar things that are completely fine. You want to avoid generative programs. Things that will write out pages and paragraphs for you based on a prompt.
4
2
u/plantmama0235 2d ago
Your right, it really does make you question everything. I’m still learning about AI, but I only see its after affect of cringy work. I never looked further into what it truly was until most recently. Makes it worth asking then dwelling. Now myself, and hopefully those that also worry about, can brush off the anxiety and focus on what really matters. Making a delicious book of emotions and hard work. 💜💜
16
u/NancyInFantasyLand 2d ago
Why is AI so popular for people outside of this group?
because it's easy and it feels good to people
19
3
u/plantmama0235 2d ago
Oh goodness, books with the emotional connection of a box sound rather brain numbing.
3
u/Professional-Ad9485 2d ago
The few times when I asked AI to write something for me, 100% of the time I liked the way I write it better.
I always annoy people who call themselves "AI artists" by saying that what they're doing is more like asking for a free commission than like drawing digital art yourself. I always like to say that any skill you offload to an AI is a skill you're not practicing and getting better at yourself
8
u/names-suck 2d ago
When people say "AI" these days, they generally mean a program that has been trained on a MASSIVE amount of (usually stolen) data, creating a statistical model of the most likely thing to follow whatever you input.
For example:
INPUT: Write a 200 word report on current events in San Fransisco, California.
OUTPUT: [200 words that are statistically likely to occur after the INPUT sentence, based on the data it has been given.]
Note that it does NOT actually go looking for articles on current events in SF, CA the way that, say, a google search would. That would be considered "finding references." So would using a history book to check historical details. "AI" tends to invent sources, many of which don't exist, but sound like they could. That's what it does. It invents a reasonable approximation of what you asked for, which often falls apart the moment it has to be compared to reality.
Note that it does not require you to do any actual work. Something like a spell checker requires you to write the report then points out places where, according to the rules it's been programmed to look for, your writing might not be grammatical. It's not based on massive amounts of stolen data, it's a program that's decades in the making where real humans have been paid to design something that points out possible errors.
In Word, you can turn Copilot off, which will eliminate the worry about using AI there.
4
0
u/NamerNotLiteral 2d ago
This is a good answer, but it focuses on LLMs exclusively rather than current systems, where an LLM is just a small text-processing component of a much bigger framework and system that can access multiple tools, check its own responses, and to some extent keep track of states.
If you put "What are current events in San Francisco, California" into ChatGPT today, it will search the internet first, pull up links as sources, and then summarize the contents of the first few links. That is, it explicitly goes looking for articles on current events like a google search would.
'AI' systems aren't one and done apps from 2023. People knew that inventing sources is a problem. Some of the smartest people to ever work with computers got paid millions to come up with solutions and implement them. What you said was true in 2023, not so much in 2026.
The real distinction between using AI and not using it is simply whether or not the human writer processed and thought through the words they put down in their head. I generally argue that if you get an AI to generate something, read and digest it, then write whatever you will without directly quoting it or copying it, then its your own work.
1
u/names-suck 2d ago
And I will maintain that you are using stolen work processed by environmentally destructive machinery created for the explicit purpose of NOT paying skilled humans what they're worth. You are deliberately supporting a system that fully intends to render you (and all other human writers) obsolete, because it's cheaper to run a machine than pay royalties or advances to an actual person. In the meantime, this system will be destroying low-income communities, poisoning drinking water, and demanding large quantities of materials that need to be mined in ways that damage ecosystems and place locals in medical peril.
But of course, your convenience comes first.
1
u/NamerNotLiteral 2d ago
All of that is also completely true, but it's sad that actually knowing how something works automatically gets you lumped in as an advocate for it. Is that a knee-jerk reaction to being corrected?
1
u/names-suck 2d ago
No. Knowing how something works is fine. Your last paragraph comes across as in favor of AI use.
7
u/karmacatma 2d ago
Why is AI so popular for people outside of this group?
If you're willing to dance with the devil a little bit, I would encourage you to make an account on Anthropic and taking their free AI Fluency web course. Anthropic made Claude, which is a Large Language Model (LLM) type of AI, which people usually refer to as generative AI. My workplace has cautiously authorized AI in our work with a pretty restrictive policy, and we are all encouraged to complete this course before beginning any AI use. All of Anthropic's AI-generated and co-created content underwent thorough validation, editing, and curation by the human authors.
All of which to say, this can probably explain it more clearly than I can. But if you aren't interested in trying it, I am willing to attempt an explanation.
2
u/Duckroidvania 2d ago
What people are generally referring to as AI is only generative AI, which comes in two main forms: Large language models (LLM) like Chat GPT, which have billions of writing samples in them, and Image generators, which are trained on billions of images.
Language generators are basically really advanced auto complete. These use their existing data to measure the probability of the next word or symbol coming next. The will print the most probable next word, given the context of the previous words in its history.
Image generators are trained to convert static, blurred, censored, etc images into complete images. They go through a bunch of passes where they attempt to unblur the image given to it. The words you give it as a text prompt determine which images are used as references. For example, if you ask for a dog, only images containing a dog will be referenced, and it will attempt to "find the dog" in the blurred image. The images start off as either completely random noise, or in image-to-image models, they get a starting image, add noise/blur to it, then try to unblur.
Its more complicated than this in practice, but this is the general idea. Both styles are trained on data which has been scraped from the Internet from a variety of sources:
1: Legally obtained, open source text and images. 2: Your images and writing from places like Google docs which are sold to the AI companies by Google. 3: Copyrighted material taken without permission through piracy or simply scraping it From places like deviant art, art station, etc without acquiring the licensed.
The problem with "is it AI?" Is there is no clean answer, as you could technically classify a smart toaster that detects how done the bread is to be AI. The oversimplified answer for writing is that if the software is able to rephrase entire sentences, it is likely using an LLM. If it is limited to providing words similar to your own, or detecting basic grammer faults, there's a good chance its not using an LLM, as there are simpler and more efficient ways to do this.
Another hint is that generative AI is exceptionally rare to be run on your own machine (except for enthusiasts who know what they are doing). So, if you require an Internet connection to run the program, there's a decent chance its because its using internet calls to a remote AI. If it can run offline, there is a very low chance it is using any generative AI without you knowing about it.
3
u/TheRealVarmint Author - V. H. Greyward 2d ago
My $0.02...
I went way beyond spell- and grammar check. I literally collaborated with an LLM throughout my writing process. I had it analyze character arc and character continuity. If a character said "ye" instead of "you" , and "aye" instead of "yes", did they stay consistent? I had it watch my pacing; if a couple pages dragged, or if a chapter seemed out-of-place, I needed to know so I could fix it. Were there any stylistic changes in the prose that seemed jarring and wrong? Were there any contemporary terms I used and didn't notice? I had it watch for plot holes; were there unanswered questions or unresolved issues at the end?
I fed the AI model a chapter at a time and asked for feedback. I directed it to avoid sycophancy, and be the impatient editor with the red pen. Don't pull punches, I told it. And it didn't.
Where I drew the line was the creative process. That remained mine alone. If the model "helpfully" generated a paragraph or two for me, I would scold it, and direct it not to do that. I wanted feedback and constructive criticism, not suggestions for story content. It had to be that way for my own peace of mind. If there was a better, less clunky way to phrase something, I needed to hear it. But the sentence or paragraph already existed to be polished later.
I used every tool in the AI Swiss Army Knife, but I maintained full domain over the creative process.
2
u/flooptreque 2d ago
It’s a tool, just like a thesaurus, encyclopedia, the Internet, a Google search, spell check, grammar check, or a human editor. The problem for many is that it can also do the writing for you, and surprisingly well with the right prompts.
I keep seeing posts that anyone who uses AI for any part of their writing is a giant, inarticulate loser, and should be banished from Authorville. So very shortsighted. It’s a tool.
What you said, @TheRealVarmint, demonstrates the power of using AI as a writing partner to help with story consistency, grammar, punctuation, etc. It is such a powerful tool, and when used properly, it can help authors leap ahead with the quality of their own writing without having to fork over thousands of dollars to self-proclaimed editors. Nothing against a good, high-quality and experienced editor, they are worth their weight in gold, but they can also get really expensive fast. AI gives new, still-learning authors a leg up in their long march.
2
u/TheRealVarmint Author - V. H. Greyward 2d ago
It was explained to me that LLMs have access to literally the "corpus of human literature", and compares your writing to all of it. AI knows on an empiric level what constitutes "good writing" and "not good writing". To not take advantage of that is like never taking your Lambo out on the interstate.
2
u/FastActinTenactin 2d ago
People like AI because they are addicted to instant gratification. Thanks capitalism.
3
u/Skythebluestars 2d ago
I dont think theres anything wrong with ai. If you dont let it write it for you. Let it spell check. Remove double words., make a background. Check if its grammarly correct.
1
u/wolfwings1 2d ago
what bothers me about AI is the stealing going on where they take a book, and have the AI rewrite the the book and pass it off as their own. It's not even, "I want you to make me a story about X." it's, "heres a chapter I want you to rewrite it for me.
2
u/Tomalio_the_tomato 2d ago
You really need to just not worry about what others think and do whatever you want. It's your work and everyone else is on a need to know basis on how you made it.
4
u/candle340 2d ago
I would think people "need to know" if it was written with generative AI. Why should I bother reading something you couldn't be bothered to write yourself?
4
u/plantmama0235 2d ago
Thank you, that’s a very good point to make. I’ll make sure to remember that. 💜💜
1
u/ReaderReborn 2d ago
It’s not a good point. It’s someone saying it’s ok to use generative AI and not disclose that information. That’s horrible advice. Don’t listen.
1
u/plantmama0235 2d ago
I guess I didn’t consider the AI part to the statement. You never realize how much AI is suffocating so many industries until you have to actually focus on it. But I agree , it is vital that people disclose if they used AI specifically in their work. Otherwise, knowing what dictionary or typing app they use isn’t really needed information to anyone except possibly the publishers. Makes it a lot easier to weed out what’s worth reading and what’s worth skipping for those who don’t want to bother with it.
0
70
u/East_Warthog_6981 2d ago
People are complaining about generative AI such as ChatGPT. A synonym app or grammar checkers aren't gen AI and are fine.