Can chatgpt make an actually good story?

[Penpilot]

(The title of the NYT bestseller AI would instantly generate as soon as those titles were both trending, that millions of people would read and everyone would mock voraciously online, making it trend for ten weeks and making the creator millions off its viral content and quotes and memes. The movie adaptation would be the new sharknado, comically watched ad nauseum and the gifs would be everywhere. Welcome to our brave new world.)

Barbenheimer | Comedy

Barbenheimer: With Emily Topper, Bix Krieger, Cayman Cardiff, Ramiro Leal. In the depths of Doll City, a group of weary dolls led by brilliant Dr. Barbenheimer build an atomic bomb. Their mission? Take down the patriarchy once and for all.

www.imdb.com

 

[Jackarandajam]

Barbenheimer | Comedy

Barbenheimer: With Emily Topper, Bix Krieger, Cayman Cardiff, Ramiro Leal. In the depths of Doll City, a group of weary dolls led by brilliant Dr. Barbenheimer build an atomic bomb. Their mission? Take down the patriarchy once and for all.

www.imdb.com

***yanks toaster from wall and marches off.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

I am AS, artificial smartass.

Quality fiction—maybe, in particular, fantasy—writing at epic lengths will be more difficult than most other art forms... Visual is relatively easy. Voice and Singing? Relatively easy, although I think it will at first require human manipulation to tweak how the words are spoken/sung. Children's books are the first threat, in particular, because there is big money in children's books.

 

[Prince of Spires]

I've studied a bit of innovation theory at university and looked into the different industrial revolutions we've gone through over the past 3 centuries. And when viewed from that perspective, there is nothing new under the sun. The discussion we see surrounding the use of AI has been had at the start of all big industrial shifts. They're always the same. The techologies will destroy all jobs and destroy human culture and society and turn our children into mindless slaves and ot their brains. You can even take newspaper headlines from diffent times, and if you replace the type of revolution, the texts will be more or less the same.

And in a way, they are correct. before the first industrial revolution, 70-90% of all people worked in agriculture. Most of their jobs disappeared, and their whole way of life is gone. We can't imagine what it's like to live in a world without instant communication, high speed travel, television, and computers. That simply doesn't exist anymore.

However, the part that is always forgotten is that this is always replaced by something new. We still have jobs, most of which are a lot better than being a poor farmhand in some backwater town somewhere. We have houses more sofisticated than what Rockefeller experienced or could even imagine.

This time it will be no different. AI will certainly destroy some jobs. If you're a cheap cover designer who sticks together 3 stockphotos for indie authors, then you're going to have to adapt to the new reality of AI or you will very soon not have a job anymore, simply because others can create higher quality covers faster for less money. That is the reality. However, that reality isn't so different from going back 20-30 years and being an commercial artist or photographer when photoshop started to become a thing.

Writing will be no different, though it's much harder. Why? Because there are a lot more variables and the "success state" is a lot harder to define. After all, you can easily see if something is an apple or if a hand has 6 fingers, and you can train a computre to fix that. But why a story works is much harder to explain and having enough training data is a big issue.

Does this mean that all writers will disappear? Of course not. There are still painters out there. Or artisans who do everything by hand. And there is still a market for them. So if you want to create without AI, then go for it. No one is stopping you or forcing you to use it.

That doesn't mean that everyone who does use it is a bad person or less artistic or not a true creator. That's just fear talking. They are simply creative in a different way.

 

[Ban]

Prince of Spires being a farmhand was a far better living than being a factory worker. People grew smaller, frailer and more disease prone in the smog-ridden cities. Just because new jobs replace the old, doesn't mean those new jobs are fulfilling, humane or worth pursuing. Furthermore, the skills and traits of one trade aren't by definition transferable to another, especially in our modern reality. Why should your average writer care that new jobs in software development open up (for instance)? There is no overlap. So what we are left with then is a shifting field of employment where both the working conditions and the job requirements are different. You can look at that and say "well the historical farmer had his life uprooted and was thereby forced into a worse existence, but his great, great, grandkids now have iPads so it ought to be fine," or you can nip the thing in the bud before it causes uprooting. History does not prescribe the future, we create it.

Perhaps instead of software development you meant to imply that these so-called "prompt engineer" jobs will emerge. I.e. jobs bereft of true creativity that render writing into an industrialized act. Suggesting a writer should transfer to that rising industry to my mind is like suggesting a trained chef should become a food vlogger instead. Sure we all see the comparison, but it's a downright terrible one to make. The aspects that make the former job worthwhile and satisfying aren't the same as those in the latter.

As for your preamble, I do want to address the sentiment with a tangent. You are falsely equating historical accounts to lived reality. Just because suffering isn't total or permanent, doesn't mean it isn't deplorable. Industrial workers suffered massively because of the industrial revolution. Their lives were uprooted and wanton capitalism (note the "wanton") forced both them and their children into the most depraved wage slavery. I don't condone suffering simply because it will wane one day. That is a separate discussion, but I find it rather callous to suggest that past pains are A-OK simply because eventually those suffering had the gumption to go ahead and lay in a grave. We live in a world built on the sacrifices people were forced to make. You don't hear about them, because they didn't control the printing presses and... hmmm, what does that remind me of?

 

[The Dark One]

However, the part that is always forgotten is that this is always replaced by something new. We still have jobs, most of which are a lot better than being a poor farmhand in some backwater town somewhere. We have houses more sofisticated than what Rockefeller experienced or could even imagine.

I'm not living in any house you design... (sorry, couldn't resist)

I kinda agree with most of what you say... the difficulty for most of us on this forum is that we are being confronted with a massive change in the nature of creativity. We are the product of centuries of creative narrative and it's all about to go down the toilet and be replaced by an army of robots with just one creator, instead of a million creators.

It was already hard enough to be published, now it's gonna be impossible.

 

[Devor]

However, the part that is always forgotten is that this is always replaced by something new. We still have jobs, most of which are a lot better than being a poor farmhand in some backwater town somewhere.

There have been estimates that AI will cut as many as 300 million jobs worldwide, which is about 9.1% of the total number of jobs worldwide. About 60% of all jobs in developed countries are considered at risk (ie, the whole marketing department is at risk while it shrinks from twelve to eight people). Most of the job losses are expected to hit white collar, middle management workers. If for the sake of discussion we equate the skills of a farmhand to those of a factory worker, it's not remotely clear that a similar white collar equivalent will emerge to replace the ones being lost - most likely, white collars workers will have to shift to either blue collar jobs or ramp up their skill set. Furthermore, it's generally accepted that AI is ahead of Robotics, and many people believe another bigger wave of job losses will occur as Robotics catches up. We're at a point where many people, even many experts, are actively pursuing a world where almost everything is automated, and 80-90% of people do not have to work.

^I'm not in favor of any of that. I'm not trying to tell people to like AI. But of all that, we're starting to see a first wave of job losses. I don't want to see people so busy hating on the technology that they refuse to learn how to use it, and then suffer from not having learned it.

 

[pmmg]

Furthermore, it's generally accepted that AI is ahead of Robotics, and many people believe another bigger wave of job losses will occur as Robotics catches up. We're at a point where many people, even many experts, are actively pursuing a world where almost everything is automated, and 80-90% of people do not have to work.

Great, that will leave us free to pursue all the great creative endeavors that connects us to our humanity and lets us do the fun aspects of creating while the bots go do the labor. What will I do with all this freedom....hmmmm.... I know, I'll go find an AI to finish my book for me

 

[Finchbearer]

There have been estimates that AI will cut as many as 300 million jobs worldwide, which is about 9.1% of the total number of jobs worldwide. About 60% of all jobs in developed countries are considered at risk (ie, the whole marketing department is at risk while it shrinks from twelve to eight people). Most of the job losses are expected to hit white collar, middle management workers. If for the sake of discussion we equate the skills of a farmhand to those of a factory worker, it's not remotely clear that a similar white collar equivalent will emerge to replace the ones being lost - most likely, white collars workers will have to shift to either blue collar jobs or ramp up their skill set. Furthermore, it's generally accepted that AI is ahead of Robotics, and many people believe another bigger wave of job losses will occur as Robotics catches up. We're at a point where many people, even many experts, are actively pursuing a world where almost everything is automated, and 80-90% of people do not have to work.

^I'm not in favor of any of that. I'm not trying to tell people to like AI. But of all that, we're starting to see a first wave of job losses. I don't want to see people so busy hating on the technology that they refuse to learn how to use it, and then suffer from not having learned it.

For someone who usually dislikes political discourse, I find this post at odds.

 

[Mad Swede]

I think that those authors who have most to fear from AI are those who write to market. That is, they pick a specific subgenre, take those structures, archetypes and other elements that characterise that subgenre and use this to write a novel with the specific aim of appealing to the audience of that subgenre. That's writing to a set pattern, something the best generative AI is already quite good at. Those authors who survive are going to be those who are original, thoughtful and creative.

 

[Karlin]

Player Piano, Vonnegut

 

[pmmg]

I am not sure anyone is really 'afraid' of it. Its just a thing. Mostly, I feel disappointment. Not for Humanity's loss of meaningless tasks, but its loss of the meaningful ones.

 

[Prince of Spires]

Their lives were uprooted and wanton capitalism (note the "wanton") forced both them and their children into the most depraved wage slavery. I don't condone suffering simply because it will wane one day. That is a separate discussion, but I find it rather callous to suggest that past pains are A-OK simply because eventually those suffering had the gumption to go ahead and lay in a grave.

I never said I'm okay with child labor or wage slavery or any of that stuff. Please don't put words in my mouth. I was merely pointing out that technology keeps pushing forward, and that overall, humanity benefits, even if it sucks for the individual.

Also, if you look at the two most recent technological revolutions, the rise of the computer and the rise of the internet/smartphone, then there is very little of these downsides in terms of human suffering. Changes in conditions were very different 300 years ago to 30 years ago, simply because society was very different. And there we went through very similar patterns, where basic jobs that seemed secure disappeared because technology replaced them.

There is no putting AI back into the box. It's as simple as that.

If you want to be a full time writer or artist then you have to factor AI into your plans. Even if you don't use it, other people will. Note that I'm not saying that you have to use it. But like Mad Swede I think you need to think about what sets you apart from AI. If all you do is write the same story over and over again (nothing wrong with that, plenty of people earn great money doing this and plenty of people enjoy reading them), then you might struggle against AI.

Of course, as already mentioned in this thread, the current generation of AI isn't anywhere near good enough to just write a complete novel. I also think it will take a long while to actually get there.

If you simply enjoy writing as a hobby, then just keep doing what you're always doing. No one is forcing you to use or do anything.

 

[Ban]

I never said I'm okay with child labor or wage slavery or any of that stuff. Please don't put words in my mouth. I was merely pointing out that technology keeps pushing forward, and that overall, humanity benefits, even if it sucks for the individual.

Also, if you look at the two most recent technological revolutions, the rise of the computer and the rise of the internet/smartphone, then there is very little of these downsides in terms of human suffering. Changes in conditions were very different 300 years ago to 30 years ago, simply because society was very different. And there we went through very similar patterns, where basic jobs that seemed secure disappeared because technology replaced them.

There is no putting AI back into the box. It's as simple as that.

If you want to be a full time writer or artist then you have to factor AI into your plans. Even if you don't use it, other people will. Note that I'm not saying that you have to use it. But like Mad Swede I think you need to think about what sets you apart from AI. If all you do is write the same story over and over again (nothing wrong with that, plenty of people earn great money doing this and plenty of people enjoy reading them), then you might struggle against AI.

Of course, as already mentioned in this thread, the current generation of AI isn't anywhere near good enough to just write a complete novel. I also think it will take a long while to actually get there.

If you simply enjoy writing as a hobby, then just keep doing what you're always doing. No one is forcing you to use or do anything.

I was a bit too vitriolic before, so I'll explain what I meant in clearer terms. I didn't say that you were supportive of these horrors (I'd hope noone is), but I provided them as counterpoints to your example. If you use the industrial revolution as a comparison, the necessary response is to portray the reality of that time. My point isn't that our times and previous times are a one to one comparison, hence why I talked about the differing challenges of the modern day (education, specialisation). What I tried to illustrate is that this idea of historical patterns justifying modern developments benefits people in power and dismisses the real suffering of workers. That such suffering now takes on different forms is clear.

 

[Devor]

For someone who usually dislikes political discourse, I find this post at odds.

Mythic Scribes has a policy against political discourse which it is my role as a Moderator to enforce, not only because the conversations can become hostile, but because they're a massive distraction when people come here to help focus on writing. But I personally enjoy political discourse, even and especially with people I disagree with, except that I've soured on the growing hostilities of people's attitudes in the last decade-ish. Regardless, our "no politics" policy leaves space for conversations directly related to the industry or to somebody's fantasy writing. AI is a big factor in what's happening in this industry right now, and there is nothing to be gained by withholding from the conversation.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

I think it's foolish to suggest that because the computer revolution didn't turn out so bad, AI won't. It's also foolish to assume that AI will turn out horrible. AI, as it stands, is just another technology, but the potential of True AI is something "other" in both the utopian and dystopian sense. The development of True AI is a point heading toward "what jobs are left for humans?" because True AI might be able to do everything. HAL won't have to take over the ship because it started out in command of a robot crew anyhow, heh heh.

Whether humanity is turned into batteries or we become fat, lazy, complacent, robot-pampered blobs like in WALL-E, or more likely, somewhere in between, is impossible to say. But, in the meantime, writers will write, painters will paint, and etc etc., and there will be a market for it.

 

[Ban]

LLM's are dangerous enough on their own. I don't think we have to jump to AGI before we have to be concerned. If the LLM's keep improving at their current rate, there doesn't have to be a single thought behind their output to put a significant portion of people out of creative work.

I think it's foolish to suggest that because the computer revolution didn't turn out so bad, AI won't. It's also foolish to assume that AI will turn out horrible. AI, as it stands, is just another technology, but the potential of True AI is something "other" in both the utopian and dystopian sense. The development of True AI is a point heading toward "what jobs are left for humans?" because True AI might be able to do everything. HAL won't have to take over the ship because it started out in command of a robot crew anyhow, heh heh.

Whether humanity is turned into batteries or we become fat, lazy, complacent, robot-pampered blobs like in WALL-E, or more likely, somewhere in between, is impossible to say. But, in the meantime, writers will write, painters will paint, and etc etc., and there will be a market for it.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

I'm less worried about "creative" work than I am about noncreative work on the grand scale of things. On a personal level, writing means something to me, but few people as a % earn a "living" at writing. More people make good money off of creating covers and selling promotional products for writers than writing, heh heh.

I'm not in a position to be predictive of the future let alone to control it. I've said it before: I'm glad to have made a small name for myself before the AI whatever-the-hell-is-a-comin' arrives. I'm just hoping to have the ability to slam the marketplace with advertising and hype a few years from now to penetrate deeper for readership and then write until I die. Make a living? Who knows. I want to find as many readers as possible who enjoy what I write. Money either will or will not come with that.

An AI-driven world will likely change the economy, not just employment, on the way to a post-scarcity world or doomsday. Who knows? Stock your basement and keep your powder dry, just in case, heh heh.

LLM's are dangerous enough on their own. I don't think we have to jump to AGI before we have to be concerned. If the LLM's keep improving at their current rate, there doesn't have to be a single thought behind their output to put a significant portion of people out of creative work.

 

[Michael K. Eidson]

Q:
Can ChatGPT make an actually good story?

ChatGPT:
Absolutely, I'd love to write a story for you! To make it tailored to your preferences, could you please provide some details? Here are a few questions to guide us:

1. What genre do you prefer (e.g., fantasy, science fiction, mystery, romance)?
2. Who are the main characters?
3. Do you have a particular setting in mind?
4. Any specific themes or messages you'd like to include?
5. How long would you like the story to be?

Feel free to answer any or all of these questions, and I'll get started!