Against AI: An Open Letter From Writers to Penguin Random House, HarperCollins, Simon & Schuster, Hachette Book Group, Macmillan, and all other publishers of America

Comments

• lupusblackfur@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  🤣 🤣

  If there’s money to be made by releasing books created by Counterfeit Cognizance, those publishers will take advantage of it to its fullest… Count on it.

  Nice try, but…

  🤡 🖕 💩

  source

  • sqgl@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Unless readers want street cred reading only books from publishers who observe the request. There will be a market for “authentic” publishers along with the more liberal slop-friendly ones.

    source
  • Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Your points don’t get better just because you coined/found a new term

    source

    • lupusblackfur@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Aaannd…

      Yours don’t improve by your being a jackass. But, doing so will earn you a quick block. Bye.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• FauxPseudo@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  It’s too early for the Butlerian Jihad to start.

  source
• veniasilente@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Cute, but we all know the only way these writers are going to get what they want is if they part ways from their current publishers and start a coöperative.

  source

  • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s actually wild how with the just-in-time economy, it has never required less capital investment to start a business like a book publisher. And yet it seems like the only people that take advantage of it are average schmo “grindset grifters” selling junk while all of the people with the real economic power literally beg the institutions out of abused them since the very beginning of their industry to please do the right thing.

    source

    • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I tried to read about “just-in-time economy” but I really don’t see how it would apply to book market?

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • veniasilente@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I’d take it part of the problem is that publisher is quite a “unglorious” job to say somehow. Like, it’s difficult to make it look fancy or interesting enough that you’d take effort, time and resources from other things you could be doing - such as, ya know, writing the story you want to write - to have to do that.

      source
  • balder1991@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    And I don’t care if something is written by AI. As people we care about the quality of the output.

    We know AI by default just creates slop but with a human in the loop, it’s possible to get inspiration for scenes, brainstorming, discuss ideas etc.

    I think a good writer would use it this way.

    source

    • veniasilente@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      AI is much like smoking (hey, it is killing the atmosphere! ). Even if a good writer uses it, the usage itseld can still cause harm for others.

      source
  • anachrohack@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Is that like a cooperative but in germany?

    source

    • veniasilente@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Oh it’s for the correct sound distinction. Compare naïve vs naive (eg.: glaive).

      source
• Treczoks@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  And demand an additional disclaimer that “use of the contents of this book for AI training purposes is explicitely forbidden”.

  source

  • Pro@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    That will 100% stop Meta from using it for training their AI for sure.

    /s

    source

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It will at least stop AI training from claiming fair use.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• tfowinder@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  That’s not how capitalism works my friend

  source

  • Pro@programming.dev ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    How does it exactly relate here?

    source
• melsaskca@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Everyone wants to protect their money under a capitalistic system. Where were you when all of the typewriter repairmen lost their jobs? Society and technology change and evolve over time.

  source

  • Flatfire@lemmy.ca ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    That’s not an equivalency. From written paper to typewriters and then to computers, writing has remained a product of the author. A typewriter repair shop would transition from mechanical to electronic typewriters and potentially to to computer repair. This is because it supports an evolving technology.

    An author cannot transition to becoming a machine, because they cannot author what they don’t write, but a publisher can continue to publish anything that would make them money. So when human experience is boiled down to nothing more than the probabalistic order of the words written by authors who gave no consent to have their work absorbed and mutilated by an LLM, the only winner is a publishing house seeking cheaper labour than the human.

    source
  • andros_rex@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    AI written books have no value.

    If it was not worth writing, it is not worth reading.

    source
• LovableSidekick@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I see this as the 2025 equivalent of the entertainment industry’s collective backlash against Napster back in the day. The issue will probably be decided by courts and legislatures, as before, and that legal decision will be transmuted into fierce morality, as before. The major difference is that with AI the legal combatants are all corporations with money to gain, whereas in 1999 it was a whole industry vs a handful of software developers and basically Lawrence Lessig. Things could turn out differently this time, and who knows - maybe our collective morality will follow suit.

  source