NaNoWriMo Is In Disarray After Organizers Defend AI Writing Tools (theverge.com) 151
The Verge's Jess Weatherbed reports: The organization behind National Novel Writing Month (NaNoWriMo) is being slammed online after it claimed that opposing the use of AI writing tools is "classist and ableist." On Saturday, NaNoWriMo published its stance on the technology, announcing that it doesn't explicitly support or condemn any approach to writing. "We believe that to categorically condemn AI would be to ignore classist and ableist issues surrounding the use of the technology, and that questions around the use of AI tie to questions around privilege," NaNoWriMo said, arguing that "not all brains" have the "same abilities" and that AI tools can reduce the financial burden of hiring human writing assistants.
NaNoWriMo's annual creative writing event is the organization's flagship program that challenges participants to create a 50,000-word manuscript every November. Last year, the organization said that it accepts novels written with the help of AI apps like ChatGPT but noted that doing so for the entire submission "would defeat the purpose of the challenge." This year's post goes further. "We recognize that some members of our community stand staunchly against AI for themselves, and that's perfectly fine," said NaNoWriMo in its latest post advocating for AI tools. "As individuals, we have the freedom to make our own decisions."
The post has since been lambasted by writers across platforms like X and Reddit, who, like many creatives, believe that generative AI tools are exploitive and devalue human art. Many disabled writers also criticized the statement for inferring that they need generative AI tools to write effectively. Meanwhile, Daniel Jose Older, a lead story architect for Star Wars: The High Republic, announced that he was resigning from the NaNoWriMo Writers Board due to the statement. "Generative AI empowers not the artist, not the writer, but the tech industry," Star Wars: Aftermath author Chuck Wendig said in response to NaNoWriMo's stance. "It steals content to remake content, graverobbing existing material to staple together its Frankensteinian idea of art and story."
NaNoWriMo's annual creative writing event is the organization's flagship program that challenges participants to create a 50,000-word manuscript every November. Last year, the organization said that it accepts novels written with the help of AI apps like ChatGPT but noted that doing so for the entire submission "would defeat the purpose of the challenge." This year's post goes further. "We recognize that some members of our community stand staunchly against AI for themselves, and that's perfectly fine," said NaNoWriMo in its latest post advocating for AI tools. "As individuals, we have the freedom to make our own decisions."
The post has since been lambasted by writers across platforms like X and Reddit, who, like many creatives, believe that generative AI tools are exploitive and devalue human art. Many disabled writers also criticized the statement for inferring that they need generative AI tools to write effectively. Meanwhile, Daniel Jose Older, a lead story architect for Star Wars: The High Republic, announced that he was resigning from the NaNoWriMo Writers Board due to the statement. "Generative AI empowers not the artist, not the writer, but the tech industry," Star Wars: Aftermath author Chuck Wendig said in response to NaNoWriMo's stance. "It steals content to remake content, graverobbing existing material to staple together its Frankensteinian idea of art and story."
Sports Analogy (Score:5, Interesting)
While they're at it, why not make sport less ableist by allowing weaker athletes to take drugs to level the playing field.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, some sports do have weight classes so you don't end up with the biggest muscle-bound testosterone factory on two legs mopping the floor with opponents half their size.
Not sure how a similar strategy could be applied to judging writing, though.
Re:Sports Analogy (Score:5, Funny)
It would be interesting to have a section in the bookstore that says "Good writers" and another section that says "Just OK writers" and then a 3rd section that says "Honestly shitty writers here"
Re:Sports Analogy (Score:5, Funny)
I think that's what the clearance section is for.
Re: (Score:3)
Where to put Stephen King?
In literary circles, SK isn't generally regarded as all that great. His use of words just isn't "good" enough, he leaves plot holes or other missteps which could be avoided, etc etc. But what he does is tells good stories that ordinary people want to read and can somehow relate to or understand. So it's tricky to know if he's a "just okay writer" or a "good writer" - it depends on who the experts are that are deciding where to put the books on the shelves.
Then again, these days, in
Re: Sports Analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
NaNoWriMo isnâ(TM)t a competition like that. The goal is just to write 50k words. Youâ(TM)re up against your own procrastination, competing time commitments, self-doubt, etc. To paraphrase Steven Pressfield, youâ(TM)re up against the Resistance.
If I squint hard enough, I can see the line of thinking that led to the organizersâ(TM) stance. Nano is ultimately an exercise in self-actualization and achievement. If a tool helps a person cross the finishing line, it should be embraced by those who need it.
But thatâ(TM)s a lot of squinting needed on my part. Nano is a writing exercise. A tool that allows you to write less is fundamentally antithetical to its mission, and accusing detractors of being -ists is a naked attempt to stifle any dissent.
Worse, LLMs are composed of public speech, almost none of which was gathered without permission. In many cases, the original posters of that information would have declined permission. And, of course, some of that data is copyrighted material and exists in what can charitably be called a legal and ethical gray area.
Itâ(TM)s hard to imagine a community that would be less receptive to allowing LLMs into the competition. This stance by the organizers is such a baffling display of misunderstanding their audience, itâ(TM)s almost breathtaking.
Luckily for all prospective writers, thereâ(TM)s nothing irreplaceable about NaNoWriMo, the organization. The organization is the definition of inessential. You want to write a novel? Go for it. You donâ(TM)t need them. You never did and never will.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
and accusing detractors of being -ists is a naked attempt to stifle any dissent.
Agreed, we'd better nip that in the bud! I mean just imagine if people started trying that tactic elsewhere!
Re: (Score:3)
(Jots down in notebook) "... Not... okay... to... learn... from... public.... speech."
Got it!
As for NaNoWriMo, it's never been serious. It's always been looked down upon as a pastime for people who will never be professional writers. So criticizing the use of AI in it is sort of like criticizing whether a person uses mods when playing a single player game. It doesn't affect you - let it go.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Kindly stuff it. No, I've never been in NaNoWriMo, but I am a published writer. One of my daughters, however, has done it for about ten years or so, and yes, she's been trying to get an agent for a major.
This is because they were bought out by wanting more money, and an AI firm had it. And using AI to write is for the jerks who come up to a writer and say they've got this great idea for a story, and the writer should write it, and split 50-50 with them.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a little surprised they don't do that with sports like basketball, swimming? If you're 4'11 you might be a proportionally very fast swimmer, but you'll never catch Michael Phelps and his 6'7" wingspan. Also there's probably 10x more absolute number of skilled basketball players 5'5 to 6' than the ~300 or so NBA players who are 6'6" or taller, but are uncompetitive due to being a full foot shorter
Re: (Score:2)
Sports generally shy away from separating competitors based on a physical attribute. The only divisions you see in almost all sports are mens and womens sports and age difference - youth competitions exclude older competitors, because those are such obvious advantages. Otherwise, generally the attitude is let the best competitor win - if the best end up mostly being really tall, or really skinny, or really muscular, then so be it.
Pretty much the only sports where you'll see official divisions based on phys
Re: (Score:3)
You can't, and that is the point. Your argument is ridiculous.
I wasn't making an argument for the use of AI, I was just poking a hole in the analogy since sports and other competitive endeavors (such as gaming) have ways of ranking people within their class. It generally is frowned upon to allow people to cheat rather than simply placing them against similarly skilled rivals, so I wasn't implying that somehow it's okay to allow cheating just because we're talking writing rather than, say, people beating the crap out of each other in a boxing ring.
Re: (Score:2)
sports and other competitive endeavors (such as gaming) have ways of ranking people within their class
That's why the best novelists are the ones that write the longest novels, write novels in the shortest amount of time, or other easily measurable aspects.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, nope.
AI is a tool (Score:2)
AI is a tool, and not a particularly good one, just like you.
You can use any tool you like to assist you, there are no forbidden tools, except some safety related stuff...
Why also ban other tools like the use of computers, printers, ball pens, and printing presses, modern book binding technologies
And only allow hand written books, hand copied by monks using feathers dipped in black ink?
Re:AI is a tool (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been doing Nanowrimo on and off for the last 20 years (gee I'm old). While the official goal of it is to write 50000 words in one month, I would say the real goal is to learn writing by self-practice, and getting insights by interacting with other people along the way. it's about kicking in a habit - the habit of writing. Many people start their first Nanowrimo with the desire of writing, and they're here to overcome their fear of not being able to write.
You won't become a good writer by doing Nanowrimo. But you will become someone who is not afraid of writing. And that's already a lot.
If you use ChatGPT, you can get your 50000 words in one hour. But what did you learn? It's not assisting you, it's doing your work instead of you. Did you become more able to write? Is it ableist to ask this?
Re: (Score:3)
There are corner cases, though, one thing that pops up would be a dyslexic who wants to write a book.
Re: (Score:3)
While they're at it, why not make sport less ableist by allowing weaker athletes to take drugs to level the playing field.
Watching sports would be more entertaining if we made all the athletes take drugs but not let them know which ones. ;)
Re:Sports Analogy (Score:5, Funny)
"And the Kenyan competitor now appears to have stopped to have an argument with a hurdle - he seems to be really angry about something! The competitor from Germany jumped into the lead and... wait, he's going back hug the Kenyan athlete and stroke his hair! The American competitor seems to still at the starting line, and... I think he's ordered a pizza? ..."
Re:Sports Analogy (Score:5, Interesting)
A better analogy: why not make sports less ableist by allowing weaker athletes to use robots to compete in their place, and then collect the trophies for themselves?
Re: (Score:2)
A better analogy: why not make sports less ableist by allowing weaker athletes to use robots to compete in their place, and then collect the trophies for themselves?
Uh, we already do that. It’s called eSports. Where the physical and the virtual representation are worlds apart.
Re: (Score:2)
allowing weaker athletes to use robots
Uh, we already do that. It’s called eSports.
It would not go well if an eSport competitor were to use an aimbot.
The comparison was to actual athletes. Who physically compete in a sport.
You mean it would not go well if you asked a member of Meal Team Six to actually run and gun that FPS game instead of using the “aimbot” mouse or game controller.
Re: (Score:3)
This is more akin to things like ramps for wheelchairs. The competition is over writing ability, not the ability to operate a keyboard or dictate a story.
I'm not saying that just allowing pure AI submissions based on prompts is a good idea, because that isn't measuring writing ability either. But allowing some AI assistance for certain tasks, the mechanical parts of the writing process, to allow people to translate their story ideas and characters into written words, doesn't seem to be unfair.
The issue is t
Re:Sports Analogy (Score:4, Insightful)
Putting story and plot ideas into words is not a purely mechanical task, like writing the words down or typing them out on keyboard. Choosing the right words to make sure the language flows in a pleasing way and to convey the atmosphere and ideas you want to convey in an effective manner is a very important part of the creative process of writing. Some people feel this is as important as plot or characterisation - I don't necessarily agree with those people, but it's definitely very important. Using dictation software would be more like using wheelchair ramps, but this is very different from generative AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Abused how, though? This is NaNoWriMo. It's not a competition with anyone except yourself. I used to do it in my early 20s; it's very unserious. Even a lot of unpublished amateur writers look down on it.
Re: (Score:3)
Fair point. I guess if people want to do Nanowrimo with ChatGPT, nobody's going to prevent them... But it's a bit sad because I don't think they will learn much along the way - which is the whole point of Nano.
Re: (Score:3)
Tell me you've never done any significant or serious writing without telling me you've never done any significant or serious writing.
Translating story ideas and characters into words isn't a "mechanical task" - it's the very heart of the creative process.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Writing a book isn't the same as entering a competition.
Re: (Score:2)
Writing a book isn't the same as entering a competition.
In a way it is. You are competing against everyone in your group (sci-fi, fantasy, YA, etc) to write a book which will get published. Your skill at conveying your story competes directly against others doing the same thing.
Considering the number of people who write a book and the number who eventually get published, it is definitely a competition.
Re: Sports Analogy (Score:2)
But that's not what Nanaimo is about. It has nothing to do with publishing, and most participants don't publish.
Its purely about writing, challenging yourself, and overcoming procrastination by setting an arbitrary one month deadline.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
While they're at it, why not make sport less ableist by allowing weaker athletes to take drugs to level the playing field.
Sure. Cat-4 amateur road racers can't compete with Cat-1 Pro road racers, so they should let the Cat-4's have bikes with electric motors. The next Tour de France will have teams charging up their bikes after every stage instead of resting and re-fueling riders. /s
If humans stop creating and just tell a computer running shitty software to do it for them, what does that make humans?
Re: (Score:2)
We already do (Score:3)
If you don't think about it it's not a problem right?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
i always can finish a marathon faster in my car, no one appreciates it. Privileged runners are the worst?!!
Star Wars: Whatever (Score:3)
Star Wars: Aftermath author Chuck Wendig said in response to NaNoWriMo's stance. "It steals content to remake content, graverobbing existing material to staple together its Frankensteinian idea of art and story."
So like sequels then.
Re: (Score:2)
So like sequels then.
Well, more like what you can get away with once you're in the inside circle within the entertainment industry. It's totally cool to reuse the same old tropes, write yet another Hero's Journey story, or do covers of someone else's songs [avclub.com], provided you've made the right connections.
Most entertainment is incredibly formulaic and people who make their living creating works that essentially are just derivative in nature too, hate that AI has pulled back the curtain.
Re: (Score:2)
...or do covers of someone else's songs [avclub.com], provided you've made the right connections.
Doesn't even take the right connections, just takes paying the proper royalties. If I cover any popular tune, I can release that with my mechanical royalty on that cover. The owner of the copyright of the actual song will need to get paid out their royalty as well, but I do not need (though most artists get) express permission (in advance) to do a cover.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Star Wars: Whatever (Score:4, Funny)
Sounds more like automated plagiarism to me.
“Good artists copy, great artists steal” - Me
Re: (Score:3)
I have to admit (Score:3)
But if the output were good, I wouldn't complain about the source.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect most people wouldn't have a problem with AI written books if the use of AI was disclosed to the reader.
However I'm pretty sure most people writing using AI don't plan to disclose this and also most of them really belive that they wrote the story and it is actually their own creative output, even though they just typed into chatGPT things like "write me a compelling murder scene where a beautiuful fat-assed russian assassin murders a british spy by sitting on his head in the style of hemmingway" an
Re: I have to admit (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is. I know people who actually do this for realz
Re: I have to admit (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Hmm. it would kinda result in a procedurally generated book. That might actually be cool.
Re: (Score:3)
If ChatGPT knows the style in which Hemmingway sat on people's heads then I've failed to find a very interesting corner of the web.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
they just typed into chatGPT things like "write me a compelling murder scene where a beautiuful fat-assed russian assassin murders a british spy by sitting on his head in the style of hemmingway"
Ah yes, Earnest Hemmingway. I loved her pornos, didn't you?
Say, did you know that your browser incorporates a spelling checker? Have you noticed any wavy red lines under your... no? Ok. Are you red/green colorblind, by any chance? Have you considered just letting AI write for you? It might be an improvement.
Re:I have to admit (Score:5, Insightful)
For me the most horrible part about mortality is that I will never have the time to read all the great books out there. Books provide an intimate connection with humanity and provide a fascinating window into the minds of others.
A book written by AI can't do that. If one were to find meaning in a book written by AI, it would be like assigning meaning to a Rorschach blob. It's a sort of randomness molded into a pattern designed to confuse humans into mistaking it for something comprehensible. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm pretty confident that the best that LLMs can achieve is Thomas Pynchon—random meaninglessness structured like a novel.
Re: I have to admit (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I guess a better way to put it is that I view books as an expression of consciousness—something I have a deep interest in. Future AIs may be able to construct technically beautiful works, but since there's no consciousness behind those works they cannot express a genuine worldview. It's like falling in love with a sociopath who has not once spoken of their emotions sincerely.
If we begin to accept AI written novels as an acceptable form of entertainment we risk empathizing with characters that are absu
Some studies on books (Score:2)
For me the most horrible part about mortality is that I will never have the time to read all the great books out there. Books provide an intimate connection with humanity and provide a fascinating window into the minds of others.
A book written by AI can't do that. If one were to find meaning in a book written by AI, it would be like assigning meaning to a Rorschach blob. It's a sort of randomness molded into a pattern designed to confuse humans into mistaking it for something comprehensible. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm pretty confident that the best that LLMs can achieve is Thomas Pynchon—random meaninglessness structured like a novel.
Reading fiction has been studied. Generally speaking, fiction doesn't make people smarter, but they *do* tend to give the reader different viewpoints, and avid readers of fiction tend to be more open to other points of view.
As to great books, I was quite surprised to find the number of astoundingly great books that have already been written, yet no one seems to read any more. I read some of the "Horatio Hornblower" novels, and they're pretty good. They were bestsellers of their time. Or "The Jungle Books" b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Point of this contest isn't creating a bearable story, it's turning-up: It's the ice-bucket challenge of literature. You can walk around the street block before you have a meal: That can be your mission regarding health and food. You can hire an Uber to drive around the block while you sit at home. I think most people recognize the shifting of the goal-posts. Here, the "Uber' is an AI chat-bot.
The problem is, NaNoWriMo is asking AI to be your running shoes, or your walking stick. Obviously, most pe
devalue human art (Score:3)
many creatives, believe that generative AI tools are exploitive and devalue human art.
Uh huh. I was once convinced to watch a German art film. The story (action? western?) was interrupted multiple times by a man running into the middle of the scene and screaming "ART!" while shitting. I don't believe that AI can do much to devalue human art after seeing that.
It all depends.... (Score:2)
People hire editors, people collaborate, I can see room for AI tools filling in those kinds of roles that normally another person would. So while I wish they would have kept their language blander, I think
Any human activity that requires skill is "ablist" (Score:4, Interesting)
Writing competitions are biased against those who can't write, piano competitions are biased against those who can't play piano, and so on. Deal with it.
Actual writers (as well as actual readers) tend to be horrified by AI. They're horrified by the low quality of what it puts out, and they're horrified by the fact that people who can't tell the difference are eager to replace working writers with computer programs. And, of course, they're horrified by the plagiarism issues that are inherent to all current LLMs.
These pro-AI guys quoted in TFS-- they need to go fuck themselves and stay far, far away from anything that involves writing. Or anything that involves human beings, for that matter.
Re:Any human activity that requires skill is "abli (Score:4, Interesting)
Writing competitions are biased against those who can't write, piano competitions are biased against those who can't play piano, and so on. Deal with it.
Couldn't agree more. This idea that everything has to be for everyone is harmful. That doesn't mean we shouldn't make accommodations where it's feasible, and in fact I think that if we give some thought in the first place it's not a big burden in general. (Retrofits could be argued over, zzz) A writing competition is no place for AI, unless it's an AI writing competition. They should have one of those! And keep it separate from the other one. Just let people have things where you can still have your own thing for free, ffs.
Re: (Score:2)
Writing competitions are biased against those who can't write, piano competitions are biased against those who can't play piano, and so on. Deal with it.
Couldn't agree more. This idea that everything has to be for everyone is harmful.
This. Absolutely this. You can't reduce everything in the world down to a lowest-common-denominator... there would be practically nothing left. What about people who can't taste or have restrictive diets? Am I now tastist or foodist? How are you gonna navigate that? Outlaw flavors?
Re: (Score:2)
This. Absolutely this. You can't reduce everything in the world down to a lowest-common-denominator... there would be practically nothing left. What about people who can't taste or have restrictive diets? Am I now tastist or foodist? How are you gonna navigate that? Outlaw flavors?
I’ve been on increasingly restrictive medical diets to the point I really can’t eat food anymore, ok a very short list of basic nutritive substances. Literally I’m intolerant to flavor lol. I’ve told people my entire life not to make the food they are making for the party/gathering/work function taste like crap just because I can’t eat it. First of all, that makes zero logical sense. Second, people forced to eat crap even I don’t want to eat but am forced to is just g
Re: (Score:3)
Actual writers (as well as actual readers) tend to be horrified by AI. They're horrified by the low quality of what it puts out, and they're horrified by the fact that people who can't tell the difference are eager to replace working writers with computer programs.
You've clearly not been keeping up with what passes for lyrics in pop songs. If anything, when big name artists start using ChatGPT to help write their songs, it will be an improvement.
Not really (Score:4, Interesting)
There is room to accommodate people. It's a matter of getting to the core of what the skill is.
But I don't see how AI writing books falls under that. This isn't a special controller configuration where the skill of the game is still present this is a computer doing it for you.
Then again if the AI was just proofreading and editing I'm not so sure. I mean authors have editors and those editors do more than just correct grammatical errors. If the AI isn't writing the story itself but is instead reading the story and making suggestions that's basically an automated editor. Now if the competition banned editors I could see that but I don't see how you would even begin to enforce that.
And to bring it back to the fighting game community there's something called a hitbox where instead of a joystick you have buttons and it allows all sorts of things that shouldn't be possible that quickly became unfair. Fighting game community instead of banning them from tournaments modified the most popular current games and the meta and gameplay at the high end around the older games evolved to take the hitbox into account.
So I could see the same thing happening here. Again assuming you're not just letting the AI write everything.
Re: Any human activity that requires skill is "abl (Score:4, Informative)
Its not a writing competition!
In Nanowrimo, you only "compete" with yourself (to write a novel in a month).
Beware (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Absolutely this. Also, if use of AI in writing were to become really widespread, equality of outcomes would mean that everyone's outcomes are equally shit.
An Example (Score:2)
I was having a conversation with someone who was firmly of the opinion that using -c, -v is "art" and someone who can do that is an "artist" when using MidJourney and the like, because of the product it produces.
Is it "ableist" to disagree?
Artificial intelligence (Score:2)
Dumb argument, unsure about the conclusion (Score:2, Insightful)
Generally when you hear people reaching for those "-ists" so casually, you can ignore them and not lose anything valuable.
Doesn't mean the conclusion of "AI writing tools are fine" is bad, but the argument is so dumb you may as well ignore people using it.
haven’t we seen this before? (Score:2)
generally when disruptive technology arrives, the market as a whole expands. why would applications based on AI models be any different?
Show me true General AI, conscious and cognitive.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A "creative"
*eyeroll*
AI can have a place (Score:2)
As far as I've seen, all the good voice recognition uses AI. So sure, we can't completely rule out AI, if some quadraplegic is using it to write down a story they are dictating. Also, computers are better than humans at catching grammitical errors (or perhaps "most humans" as I regularly catch errors in books I read).
We can't completely rule out the use of AI in assistive technology roles, but having AI write or rewrite parts of your story according to a particular style (and by that I mean, say, "gothic ho
Re: (Score:2)
I like AI as a way to generate relevant suggestions for breaking writer's block. All human writing is derivative, I don't see an issue with an author using AI as an assistive technology just because it's trained on prior human writing.
I do see a problem with letting AI do too much of the job. Writing is a human endeavor, with both writing and reading it being a human experience. Even once AI is good enough to replicate human-level creativity and skill, using it to do so diminishes humans, it takes someth
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Brand destruction (Score:2)
If you're entire brand is built around people sitting down and doing the work of creating something the worst possible thing you can do is tell people they can take the shortcut of not doing the work. This destroys the brand.
AI has great potential... (Score:2)
...for solving real problems in science and engineering
We don't need crappy AI writers or artists churning out endless volumes of remixes
As a disabled person... (Score:3)
I find this usage of the term "ableist" to be completely ridiculous. Admittedly the word is being thrown around way too easily by disability activists themselves nowadays, but hey I was born well into the last millennium so what do I know.
Re: (Score:2)
In this context it is bullshit.
But, there is also real ableism, and it does not even have to be associated with disability. Some people are exceptional, if they expect everyone else to be exceptional and look down on them if they are not... yeah.
A person secure in their ability does not need to tear others down for not being able to do what they can do. They can accept that different people are different, and that's okay.
"Ableist" is one of the silliest terms of all time (Score:2)
Accommodating people's needs in daily life is common decency. Changing the definition of a task to accommodate lack of talent is sabotaging human consciousness.
Still, anyone who uses anecdotes like this to bitch about "wokeism" can suck a dick. It's not a real problem. Just a silly one.
*Sigh* This old debate again (Score:2)
When I was a student (a few decades ago, admittedly) there was this movement claiming that colleges and universities were "elitists" by only allowing top sudents in, and it wasn't fair to average students.
So the colleges and universities started letting average students in by lowering the standards of their admission tests. And, predictably, a few years later, the graduation tests started getting easier too, because otherwise a huge percentage of all classes would flunk and that wouldn't look too good for t
Uh oh ... (Score:2)
... the cool kids have to supposedly hate AI chatbots, but they also have to hate "ableism" and "classism"!
Fire up the reserve cognitive dissonance generators!
As a writer myself, I say ... (Score:2)
Those who can, do.
Those who can't, use AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Those who can't, take part in NaNoWriMo. ;)
I groan inside... (Score:2)
... every time someone calls themselves "a creative".
It's like watching a person brag about how smart they are. Dude, if you were actually smart, you wouldn't need to be telling people.
Adjectives of praise are supposed to come from third parties. You're not supposed to praise yourself.
Well, there ya go. (Score:2)
I've participated in NaNoWriMo several times over the years. At one time I participated on their forums pretty regularly. I've published books I've written during NaNoWriMo, after several months of polishing of course. One thing that seems to resonate through the entire endeavor is an odd vibe that something ain't quite ticking right within the organization. Maybe it's the times, but there was an overall "must accept all things always" thing going on, and I don't know about anybody else but that's never bee
AI *after* writing might be ok... (Score:2)
So this seems to be an issue against using AI to generate "original" content (yes, the quotes are deliberate).
And I agree, that's wrong.
But what about an AI editor/proofer? We already have tools that can analyze for spelling and grammar and not only are they widely used, it is considered silly NOT to use the spellcheck in your editor of choice.
How about an AI based editor that can give advice on a more meta level? Something like, the story bogs down in description on page 3 when it really needs to be acti
Technology slowly destroying the individual. (Score:2)
One of those abilities may be the skill to put thought to paper (ok today it's just thought to screen), but if those words are curated by someone else is it really 'your' ability?
On the other side part of being unique is not having an ability.
Technology such as AI just makes us all look the same. I guess that's Ok for work - which would then beg the question: why aren't we all just paid the same wage regardless of underlyin
Were you always ...? (Score:2)
Was the competition "classist and ableist" all the years before these tools were available for purchase?
And how on Earth can you say this is "classist" as if you're punching up, when you have to be affluent enough to purchase the outsourced labour for resale as competition entries?
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite. See, an AI editing/rephrasing service actually sponsors NaNoWriMo. This was about defending their sponsorship.
Background on NaNoWriMo (Score:5, Informative)
Run away *quick*. This is a dangerous cult.
(I'm in the middle of writing my first book, woo hoo (!) and I researched NaNoWriMo and other writing methods.)
NaNoWriMo is an interesting take on analysis paralysis.
Lots of people have goals and dreams that they don't start (or don't complete) for various reasons. NaNoWriMo attempts to fix this by forcing people to get *something* completed on one of their dreams.
I never understood this until I read the succinct description: "It's easier to fix crap than air".
The point is that if you have something down on paper, no matter how bad, it's a lot easier to see the flaws and correct them. If you have *nothing* on paper, then it's impossible. Lots of people have good ideas, but don't know where to start, or start and stop because the result is awful.
It's essentially rapid development. People are finding that it's a lot *lot* more cost and time effective to simply take a stab at a solution than it is to spend a ton of time researching what the *best* solution is.
NaNoWriMo asks people to write roughly 1500 words/day for 30 days. It forces you not to worry about formatting, not to worry about all the flaws and inconsistencies, and not to stop until you get to the end. Once you have something down on paper, you can spend time fixing it up.
The 1500/day number is about average for famous authors. Stephen King writes 2000/day, that's a little on the high side but definitely doable (I sometimes get 2500/day when conditions are right), lots of authors do 1000/day, and some as little as 600.
Baen Books (from their website) states that they will only consider publishing novels of length between 100K and 200K words, the average novel is around 80K words, and novellas are somewhat smaller, in the 50K word range.
Chris Baty (creator of NaNoWriMo) in his book states that he reduced the number to 50K words to make it easy for people to succeed. That's a little low, more on the novella side, but it lets more people succeed at writing. You have to write at least 50K words in one month, but it can be the first part of a longer novel.
From the Wikipedia page: "By 2015, 431,626 people participated (633 different regions) in NaNoWriMo. Of those participants, more than 40,000 won."
The purpose is to have fun, make writing a community effort (each person encourages each other to write), and set and complete a self-challenge.
It's not a cult.
The fact that you haven't heard about it doesn't make it a cult.
(Oh and I'm essentially face blind so I have trouble writing physical descriptions. ChatGPT: Write a 1-paragraph description of a head-shot photograph of Ben Carson => modified and optimized and put into my own words => description of a major character (PhD Doctor) in the book. Easy peasy. Use ChatGPT like you use a thesaurus: as a crutch, not a scooter.)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Disabled don't need AI (Score:2)
This was my thought exactly. Its like someone with ADHD or a missing arm getting offended because someone else said "some disabled people use wheelchairs".