If you’d like to receive my blog in your in-box each week, click here.
Just in time for the holidays, the hubs and I recently watched a Netflix documentary called Buy Now that has me never wanting to shop again. A disturbing look at the retail industry, the film digs deep into the methods and techniques these companies use to encourage people to buy more, more often.
Though I strongly recommend watching this film, I found it profoundly disturbing to learn about not only the vast amounts of waste generated by the retail industry, but the deliberate downgrading in quality of products—“planned obsolescence”—to create disposable merchandise, encourage a constant repeat-buying cycle, and maximize company profit margins.
And then I read about a publishing company that recently made a splash in publishing industry news by announcing that they hope to “disrupt” the book business by publishing around 8,000 titles a year using AI to automate much of the production cycle. They advertise that if you give them a manuscript, within weeks they will give you “the thrill of being a published author.”
I have thoughts.
Automated Publishing
A bit of exploration on this company’s website reveals a sizable staff, “fostered by the visionaries behind Israel’s leading publishing company.” But despite whatever experience and expertise they may have, the bulk of the work will openly be conducted by AI, from the “instant” analysis of your book’s marketing potential, to proofreading, formatting, cover design, audiobook production, and even marketing materials.
AI is a fascinating and powerful tool that many creatives are already using in productive ways to facilitate various aspects of their writing. It’s certainly already making an impact in our industry, as I discussed here and here.
It may in fact disrupt the industry. I already know authors who use it to augment and streamline their own writing careers: as a virtual assistant, a brainstorming partner, a marketing tool, and yes, an audiobook narrator. I can foresee a time when publishing companies rely more and more on it too, in many of the ways the company in the above article is already using it. I’m even eyeballing EditGPT as a potential disruptor of my own career as a developmental editor.
One day. But I don’t believe today is that day.
Recently I’ve started using an AI image-generation program to illustrate some of my slides for presentations, and I do indeed get usable images to visually illustrate concepts more readily than if I tried to search for existing highly specific images online. For instance, I asked for an illustration of an author drowning in a sea of books, and got this:
But I have to sift through a lot of unusable ones too. On a recent search where my prompt was, “Two opponents in a cage fight. One is labeled as truth, the other is labeled as myth. Truth is winning the fight,” AI yielded these submissions:
Beyond the superfluous limbs, the wings sprouting from nowhere, and I don’t know what the hell that guy at the desk is doing in there, these images don’t convey the spirit of what I was looking for, the essence of it.
You know why? AI doesn’t get that. That’s the creativity part—not just the execution of material, but the creative spark behind it that thinks figuratively, imagines, makes connections, and yields a product that’s greater than the sum of its actual parts.
In my own field, AI has long been used to monitor spelling and basic grammar mistakes, for instance with Microsoft Word’s built-in Spelling and Grammar feature. But as you no doubt already know, this is a hit-and-miss proposition. Grammar is not math, where there is often one clear answer that conforms to unshakable formulas. It’s fluid and subjective and context-specific in many cases, and often the “corrections” it offers are wrong or clunky.
And proofreading for technical errors is not editing a manuscript’s substance or style. That, too, is art as much as—perhaps more than—technique.
Right now I don’t believe we’re at the point where much of the book production process can be fully automated or farmed out to AI because it’s a creative medium, and machine learning can’t actually create—it can only replicate, paste together pieces of what it’s procured from other sources, like Victor Frankenstein using grave-robbed body parts to make his monster. I mean yeah, it’s anthropoid, but the thing isn’t even close to human.
Creativity vs. Commodity
But whatever AI is or is not capable of doing or doing well right now, I fully expect that as it evolves it’s likely to get ever better and more viable, and may indeed replace many parts—and people—involved in the publication process.
What bothers me most about that is the same thing that disturbed me about the Buy Now documentary: It feels like a churn and burn, not unlike the “fast fashion” that’s one of the shortsighted, profit-driven industries the documentary talks about. Fast fiction, if you will—and nonfiction and memoir and poetry and any other genre you can conceive of.
To me, that approach devalues the product—the author’s work, the story itself—the same way that fast fashion has resulted in cheap, disposable fashion, most of which won’t hold up to more than a few wearings.
And if I’m honest, what really bothers me is that I actually can see this model finding enough success to indeed disrupt our industry to some degree. While we’d all like to believe that every reader demands top-quality writing and storytelling with every book, that’s just not always true.
I suspect there is in fact a market for a steady stream of stories that are mediocre or even worse, readers who simply want a constant supply of new diversion rather than carefully crafted stories of substance, the same way there is certainly a market for cheap, disposable clothing that isn’t meant to live in anyone’s closet beyond the season.
The Buy Now documentary is filled with images of landfills and dumps and burn piles and garbage piled and washed up across the landscapes of countries around the globe. Not just clothing and other fashion, but toys and home goods and food and electronics, all piled up negligently in heaps of garbage that are not only unwanted, but that are now cluttering and endangering our planet. Items that were designed to wind up here, having served their purpose of yielding a quick profit for the companies that manufactured them.
The idea of treating my own creative work that way cuts me to my soul. Publishing may indeed be just one more commodified industry, but it’s not often the author who reaps the benefits of that churn-and-burn profit model. Somebody is in fact making good money from it, but it’s probably not you as the creator of the product, any more than it’s the workers in factories churning out fast fashion or cheap electronics. It’s the companies marketing and selling these products.
In this type of business model it’s not your creative work that is the true commodity. It’s you. The real commodity is you.
And in this type of business model that’s peddled to authors, it’s not even your creative work that is the true commodity.
It’s you. The real commodity is you, the creator who wants “the thrill of being a published author” and is willing to pay for it.
Read more: “When Creators Become the Customers”
Creating a Writing Career in a Fast-fiction World
This type of “fast fiction” business model might “disrupt the industry” indeed, but perhaps not in the way the company’s founders are implying. For all its focus on profit margins, publishing is still at its core an industry based on human creativity—not just authors but editors, designers, even marketing and PR. But the fast-fiction mentality may affect publishing in the same way that the fast-fashion mentality has affected that industry, resulting in a push-button assembly line of mass-produced “product” and a glut of disposable, low-quality items.
There are already more than 2 million books published per year at the last official count. Imagine how that number might leap exponentially with that same churn-and-burn mentality applied to books. Imagine how much harder it’s likely to be to capture readers’ eyes and wallets, to compete for attention amid that tsunami of product. Those that rise above all that noise will not necessarily to be the best, most quality products, but the ones with the highest production and the biggest marketing budgets—the SHEINs of publishing.
What happens to everyone else? Given the slim chances most authors have of making significant money from their writing already, imagine how much less likely that might be in that future.
So what does that mean for you as a writer?
Right now I’m working on the audiobook for my most recent book, The Intuitive Author, which entails additional expenses when I have not yet earned back what I already spent on production of the print and electronic versions. While I likely will, I don’t expect to make my fortune on this book, or any of my books, which not coincidentally is the idea The Intuitive Author is in part based on: the reality that most writers won’t make a living from their writing. The book’s central premise is that understanding that core truth of our industry is key to creating a satisfying and sustainable career on our own terms, one where we have autonomy and agency over our creative work and how it reaches readers.
That’s why I’m working so hard to create the best audiobook possible, and why this work—all my creative work—is fulfilling to me: because I know why I’m doing it, and what I want from my career, and clearly defining its risks and rewards for myself allows me to create quality work I can be proud of and relish sharing with others. Work that I imagine in my highest hopes may add something of value to the world and help people for years to come, maybe even after I’m gone.
It can be easy to lose sight of the core foundation and motivation for most of us as creators: the work itself. We live in a money-driven, “success”-driven world where often value is equated with profit or “reach” or other external barometers of validation: churning out “product” rather than focusing on process, which is the only part we can control, and the deepest source of satisfaction for our creative work.
That’s one reason I think I’ve been so affected by Buy Now. I want to be more mindful about the choices I make and their impact, not just on me but in the world.
After seeing the truth of the planned obsolescence of so many products and how the retail industry focuses on manipulating people to buy ever more stuff that winds up polluting our world, I’m planning to be more thoughtful and deliberate about my own decisions as a consumer. I’m going to question the instant-gratification mentality of online buying, I’m going to think about the ramifications of my purchasing decisions, and I’m going to use those decisions toward creating the kind of world I want to live in and leave behind.
I don’t know how much impact my single contribution might make, but what I do know is the effect it can have on my own psyche and satisfaction and comfort level. That’s all within my control. And maybe if enough of us like-minded folks have the same approach to consuming, our cumulative efforts might help make the world a little safer, a little cleaner, a little more sustainable…a little better.
I want to make those same kinds of deliberate choices with my career and my creative work, which are also elements under my control. I want to create the best work I can. I want it to be as polished and professional as possible. I want to feel it’s of real value to people. I want to have the experience of working to learn and improve and deepen my writing, and the pleasure of that creation that results from my hard work and dedication, and I want to leave something behind me that I can be proud of.
Those kinds of choices feel more responsible and sustainable for me and my values and the kind of world I would like to be part of creating, just as adhering to the quality and value that’s important to me in my work also feels more ethical and gratifying and fulfilling.
There will always be those willing to turn a quick buck whatever the cost and conditions, in retail as well as in our own industry. It’s up to each of us to decide what matters to us, what we value, and what gives our efforts worth for ourselves.
And maybe, if enough of us as individuals reject the shortsighted disposable-commodity mindset, we can shift the demand toward higher-quality, more lasting products that can transform how industries approach their business model, and literally help change the world.
Tell it to me, authors—what do you think of the fast-fiction model? Is it something you’d try out or can see the appeal of? Do you use AI in your own work, and if so how? And how do you use your own buying dollars to support your values?
If you’d like to receive my blog in your in-box each week, click here.
24 Comments. Leave new
Thank you for this, Tiffany. My parents both grew up in tight-knit farming families, affected by the Depression and learned how to make do without or by cobbling together. Seeped in those practices, I sought sustainable, frugal, green ways of living. I’ve learned to not shop, to shop farmer’s markets and second hand stores when able.
I’m not inclined toward the fast-fiction model. I’m thankful for your encouragement that writers define, for ourselves, what success looks like. I have a fulfilling day job. My writing is enjoyment (and escape!). I do wish to publish my story someday, when I’m satisfied it’s ready. There are savvy influencers and street teams, that might still shape which books are saved from drowning ?
I think so many of us have gotten sucked into the disposable-commodity mindset! I’m also old enough to remember my parents and grandparents, colored by the Depression, using every inch of the cuts of meat they got, for instance, mending clothes, repairing appliances (though they didn’t need it much–we had a washer that saw me through childhood and into adulthood!). We’ve become so wasteful, and the doc points out that part of that is understandable and not really consumers’ fault; we’re being inundated with cheaply designed products and messaging that it’s easier/cheaper to just replace things. But all those discards go…where? We throw things away, but the doc points out that there is no “away”–it winds up polluting our world somewhere, affecting us all. Like you, I’m a fairly practical soul and have learned to fix my own shoes, do basic mending. I try to hold on to things longer (my husband and friends tease me that I will keep things forever because they are still “perfectly good!”).
And like you, I’m not much on publishing just to publish, or hastening to a product in my creative work, rather than relishing the process, which is the only part I can control. And I think you’re right–there are still ways to reach readers–maybe not on the scale of companies with deeper pockets, but enough to create a satisfying, rewarding creative career. Thanks for your thoughts, Lisa.
RE: the Buy Now documentary, while I’m glad people are talking about this important topic, the producers of the film did not compensate or credit some of the experts who consulted on the film, including Aja Barber, who wrote Consumed: The Need for Collective Change: Colonialism, Climate Change, and Consumerism.
Wow, you have inside info. I’ll have to read up on that!
My father, shaped by the Great Depression, used to intone, “But it new; wear it out; make it do, do without.” Yet he was a spiffy dresser in his new clothes, happy he no longer had to make do, at least not *all* the time.
Too much of what I begin to read in bookstores is nicely crafted, play-by-the-rules dross. Did AI write them, or edit them, or teach their human authors? I really do wonder.
What does *not* seem like AI is your marvelous book, Intuitive Editing. I’m now typing up the underlinings and annotations I’ve made in it. And I’m halfway through, and will reread, your other book, The Intuitive Author. It’s like having a calm, wise friend I can always call on.
I do think there’s a balance to strike between preserving what we already have, and supplementing with (controlled) purchasing of new. The key is being mindful, I think. The doc suggests keeping purchases in your online cart for a month before hitting “buy,” and I like that. It’s too easy to impulse shop for a bunch of crap you don’t really need. The delay lets you be more thoughtful–and I certainly purchase a lot less readily IRL than I would online.
Thank you for the wonderful comments about my books! That’s so rewarding to hear–I’m thrilled you’re finding them helpful. 🙂 Thanks, Elena.
Tiffany, thank you for this post, and for exposing the heart of what makes slow publishing by humans a desirable and necessary option in a day of push-button-shopping and the mind-set that whatever is fastest and easiest, fueled by technology is best. It reminds me of the old saying: “That’s the best thing since sliced bread.” My parents embraced a number of manufactured food products in the med-twentieth century because it seemed like they were wonderful innovations that made feeding a family cheaper and easier. Now we know many of those products are not good for us, and we’ve reverted to home-made whole-wheat bread we have to cut ourselves, slathered with real butter.
I don’t see the point of writing with AI and getting work out as fast as possible. Oh I understand that for some people it’s a scheme to make fast money. But truly, even for someone pushing books out fast with AI, there are probably better ways to make money (and more of it) even ways that allow someone to stay work from home. And for people who are writing because they love words and books, how does AI satisfy the urge both to create and to communicate? If I use AI to write a story faster and publish sooner, I might make more money, but I’ll also know I am not communicating authentically. It’s not me telling a story–the best story I can come up with–it’s a machine pushing a prefab story out on the world. And I may be in the minority here, but I don’t believe AI will ever get good enough to tell a story with the same heart and truth that comes from a human writer, no matter how polished it might be.
For this reason, I have not been tempted to use AI, despite many writers and teachers of writers who are pushing it–telling me I have to bring myself into the AI world to be effective. I will write my slow stories and let them take their chance in the world, knowing I have communicated my own thoughts to another person (or more than one if I’m fortunate to find a following).
Eileen, I am totally with you. Call me a Luddite. ;D
Great point, Eileen–it does seem a lot of people are moving back toward a slow-food, artisan, less mass-produced mindset (and certainly we’re more mindful of nutrition! The things we ate when I was growing up…). I sure hope we don’t lose a lot of the regulation we’ve had on the food industry that has helped us move away from unhealthy and even dangerous diets.
I tend to agree with you–this career isn’t about a fast buck for me, and it’s not about churning out product. It’s the creative process, the pride I take in crafting something, how I learn and am changed by that process. That said, there sure is money to be made in the industry–just not so much by the writer, as I said in the post, and in fact writers are the ones paying for a lot of those industries and people.
I think AI can have a place as a way to help us work better, more efficiently. I use it, for instance, to generate “bad fiction” examples for my presentations… 🙂 It can be a tool–like Word was and is a great tool for authors. But yeah, farming out our creative work to it feels counterintuitive to why we do this–and to the creative product. I don’t know if AI can ever really duplicate the full depth and breadth of really moving, truthful, heart-filled story, as you say, but I do think it can churn out perfectly credible formulaic stories (which, let’s face it, many writers actually already do too). But each creative has to figure out whether and how and how much they might want to use AI as a tool, in a way consistent with their own goals and values. Thanks for your thoughts on this, Eileen!
Thank you for this chilling analogy, Tiffany. I saw the ‘Buy Now’ doc and likewise wanted to barf and never shop again (however, I don’t partake in fast-fashion. In fact, I owned a green retail store for 5 years.). I also have zero interest in participating in any fast-fiction publishing model. Being in tech I understand the impact on our psyches. Writing is the last place I have any control and creativity in, and I guard it!
BARF AND NEVER SHOP AGAIN–exactly, Tara! Plus I really resent (and am disturbed by) how these tech companies are working to manipulate our minds and behavior and action. The Social Dilemma documentary had a similar effect on me. And I’m fascinated by your “green retail” store–what is that, sustainable fashion, like Quince? Or secondhand?
Ah, with fast fiction, I can expect the overly-formulaic novels that I roll my eyes at now become even more formulaic. Ugh. I’ve never bought into the fast fashion, either. I guarantee you, I spent less per wear on the L.L. Bean sweaters that lasted 20 years (with a small amount of mending) than people spend buying disposable clothing of Temu or Shein. You get what you pay for sometimes
It’s true, Susan–for a while now I’ve been focusing on quality over quantity. A few great, well-made, classic items of clothing can be staples you have for the long term. I have clothes in my closet that I’ve had literally since college.
I feel the same way about stories and writing–my own and others. To each his own–we all need to consider and concretely define what we want from our careers, what that entails, and how we can sustain a satisfying, happier writing career.
I cannot agree with you more Tiffany! I think this article hits me in two ways: as an editor, author and wife of a tailor, who often works on fast-fashion clothes that cannot be easily repaired because the quality of construction is so flimsy. Having lived overseas, particularly in Germany, I was quickly rewired to dislike fast fashion or the fast creation of anything (that doesn’t need to be made quickly) because it destroys both the journey and the end product. I found in Germany that people were more likely to spend money on quality products that they expected to “last forever” as my best friend said.
With books I also want everything that I publish to feel like it’s been through a good vetting process in the production cycle. One of my favourite parts of getting published, or helping others get published is the layout process and the back and forth over fonts, typesetting, placement of maps, etc… Just handing that over to AI sounds soul destroying!
I love talking to my cover designers and seeing what they create (that’s so much better than anything I could envision!). I’ll be hard pressed to hand over such careful drawing or graphic design to a machine. While I love the idea of automating tasks that are easily assigned to AI, without an impact to human sustainability and livelihood, I think the greater question your article asks is: how can we be more humane, considerate and aware of our impact on our fellow humans now and in the future?
Let’s not be disruptors simply for profit. Let’s disrupt, instead, systems that are contributing to poverty, that aren’t allowing everyone to have a sustainable income, etc… Meanwhile, you’ll see me continue to wear clothes I’ve owned for longer than two decades, and that’s a-okay with me! I love continuing to find ways to not be wasteful. 🙂
That’s interesting that Germany is less of a fast-fashion market–I wonder if that holds true for other countries as well, and for other products? I’d like to think so…but on the other hand it makes me sad about us. I think you’ve boiled this issue down to the relevant question: “how can we be more humane, considerate and aware of our impact on our fellow humans now and in the future?” It’s stunning to me, particularly with lawmakers and those who might regulate and enforce more stringent guidelines particularly about waste products and their disposal, how many aren’t seeming to give thought to the future and the generations to come, especially when so many have children. We don’t, and I still worry about the world we may leave behind.
And yes…while I’ve always been a fan of capitalism–I like living a nice lifestyle as much as anyone, and I don’t mind hard work–lately I’ve been questioning its excesses and some of its ramifications when uncontrolled. I’ve been thinking a lot lately, for myself, “What is enough?” And that’s the question that baffles me with billionaires who are often the ones driving this kind of profit-at-any-cost model. Don’t they have enough? I feel as if I do, and I’m nowhere near their net worth.
I agree with you that the process is what matters to me, particularly with any of my creative work. Even with the audiobook I’m working on, I relish crafting it just the way I want it to…even when it takes longer. The book is so much written in my “voice” that I can’t imagine having the audio version be in anything other than my actual voice. And it’s fun to record it, even when I’m running into technical issues (as my engineer and I are working on right now…).
And I’m with you–I’m holding on to my clothes that my husband teases me for saying are “perfectly good” and refusing to get rid of. 🙂 Thanks for such a thoughtful comment. Britta. And it’s nice to hear from you!
The unfortunate thing here is, using AI ‘artwork’ takes $$ away from human artists. I, for one, post photos on sites such as Shutterstock, and get a small ‘royalty’ each time someone uploads an image of mine. So it’s not just about publishing books… the cancer spreads far and wide 🙁
It’s true, Linda–great point. I try to be mindful too about making sure I’m supporting the artists directly whenever possible. I don’t think it’s possible (or practical) to make all our consumption decisions on that, though. For starters, most of us can’t afford the often higher prices of buying exclusively artisanal or original items, and some things are just more practical to buy mass-produced–I’ve used the analogy of plates or coffee mugs or glassware or similar. It’s not really feasible for most to go to the potter or glass artist and commission a set. And Shutterstock and similar sites are good in that they credit the artist and pay a small royalty, as you say, but those types of services, too, can make it tougher for artists to make a viable living form selling their work (the way that sites that pay pennies on the dollar of what they used to for freelance writing have made it hard for writers). That said, I sure couldn’t afford to pay countless artists what their work may be worth to illustrate my articles and presentations.
We have to balance reality, progress, and business with art and creativity, and it’s not always black-and-white. But each of us must decide for ourselves how we value our work and what path we want to take with it.
“I have thoughts.”
Wow! So do I.
I write because it is my soul’s work, and I wish to honor that calling, finally, at this stage in my life. I agree the joy of writing is the process, not the outcome. I don’t have my sights set on the NYT Bestseller list or any other list for that matter. And I am very aware I will not make a living by writing. I write, as you do, in the hopes that my words touch the people they are meant to and in some way help them. Yet, I also hear and share your concern about the negative impact of AI. I see it in education and its impact on students using it instead of writing themselves. It’s a quick fix, a churning out of a product for which they don’t care about and feel it’s a waste of their time. They don’t see or comprehend the value in what we ask them to do.
I applaud and seek to join you in making better, more informed purchase choices and continuing to resist the “instant gratification” tug. As others have shared, my parents were depression babies. I grew up in a household where every penny was considered. We never had a brand name anything. Having taught in higher education for over 25 years, I am concerned that the younger generations, raised on technology, the internet, and social media, will find it harder to step back from instant gratification, which seems to feed into the business model you wrote about. It’s about stuff, not substance.
I believe one person can make a difference. It was a joy to read what matters to you, what you aspire toward, and why you write. I feel a kindred spirit here. Thank you for sharing. I already added the documentary to my watch list.
In response to your questions, I am not a fan of this fast-fiction model. It speaks to achieving something without doing the work, which I see as a concerning pattern these days. Writing is hard work, but it grows you in the process. I have just started using AI to help me with research for the book I am writing, but I also check the sources.
“I write because it is my soul’s work, and I wish to honor that calling.” Damn, Emily, that’s beautiful. And it matches how I feel about my work too. I think you’ve put your finger on something about AI that underlies my reservations about it and this company’s business model: At the risk of sounding like a cliched elder shaking my fist at progress (I am really, really not that, and often welcome advances), I do agree that there is so much of value in slower processes for so many things, and creativity is prime among them. I’m picturing the students you mentioned, and imagining how much is lost for them in not having the opportunity to explore that, to sit in their imaginations, even in boredom; to discover creativity in “making do.”
I remember once I coproduced and directed (in my baby acting days) an independent film, and our budget was minuscule, so we had to find really creative workarounds for a lot of elements to get the look and feel and story we wanted on film. And so often those workarounds yielded some of our favorite things about the film, or let us discover new layers or aspects we never would have if we had pressed a button to solve the problem the easiest, fastest way. There’s inherent value in the process–honestly I think that’s what most of life is, the experiences we have, not the things we accumulate. The fast-cheap-product mindset tries to promise us that it’s the “things” that will yield the feelings we want, but it’s not. It’s the experiences. I’m focusing on that in my own choices these days for how I spend my time, my money.
Funny–I believe one person can make a difference too, even if just a small one that is a single cog in a giant wheel of change. I think if I stop believing that, it’s when I’ll feel pointless and hopeless about the world, so I strive to hold on to it (even when it’s hard…like lately). Some of the most impactful moments of my life, ones that literally changed the course of it, I can trace back to a single person. That has to matter.
You’re smart to check AI’s sources. 🙂 And I do think it can have a place as a tool for us; I use it for little tasks like that too, and it saves me time. But like you, I am conscious of keeping its role small and minor in my creative work–if the work itself isn’t coming from me then it has less value for me, and that’s my ultimate arbiter of its worth, not the money I can get from it, or its influence or reach. It has to be what it adds to my life, or I’m putting my happiness and satisfaction in it onto factors that are beyond my control and constantly in flux, instead of in my day-to-day satisfaction and fulfillment. Thanks for your thoughts, Emily, and your kind words.
“There’s inherent value in the process–honestly I think that’s what most of life is, the experiences we have, not the things we accumulate. The fast-cheap-product mindset tries to promise us that it’s the “things” that will yield the feelings we want, but it’s not. It’s the experiences. I’m focusing on that in my own choices these days for how I spend my time, my money.”
I completely agree.
“Some of the most impactful moments of my life, ones that literally changed the course of it, I can trace back to a single person. That has to matter.”
Yes, this is absolutely true for me as well.
Great post!
It’s a shame writing has become so commodified that so many people no longer really care what they’re churning out or consuming.
However, you prove the point for those who do work that matters – if you care about what you do and you are creating connections that is the satisfaction right there.
AI doesn’t have a soul, and no matter what – it can’t be bought!
Keep your prostitution level high.
Principles are expensive for a reason. Be glad you’re part of that elite group that chooses to pay for them 🙂
I think there will always be uses for labor-saving tools, as AI can certainly be–and I do feel it’s up to each creator to determine whether, when, and how much of tools like that to utilize. We all need to eat and deserve to be paid for our work and profit from it, and if AI or any other tool can aid in that then I can understand the impulse to use it. But like you, Syl, I do hope that we don’t lose the soul of creative work in the process.
I can’t imagine turning over a manuscript I spent 3-4 years writing to AI. I appreciate the person-to-person exchanges, the mix of experiences and personalities in the writing world. I have used ChatGPT to generate some blog outlines, but have to add my own voice and carefully check references before publishing.
I agree with you, Lee, that I value the creative process and it’s not worth farming out to AI for me. And at least for now, I don’t think AI can generate the kind of original, creative work required for most elements of the publishing process.