Search options (Page 1 of 3)

Yikes, that's harsh!

I found myself being super polite to AI, thinking that I didn't want it pissed off at me. Then I heard a story about a guy who insulted AI and it responded with: "I know where you live," (!!).

Anyway, those are good tips on spotting AI reviews. Anyone who does that should be outed publicly so they don't get any reviews. (Or at least warned that their actions have consequences.)

Or Gulliver’s Travels — arguably the best piece of satire ever written.

Jonathan Swift and Dostoevsky would have a field day today with satire and psychology (respectively). Unashamed self-plug: the Lindsay book is a lot inspired by Swift's satire (also cartoons, and definitely Dr. Seuss). My spidey sense shudders with the notion that satire (as a writer's self-defense mechanism in Swift's time) may be coming back into vogue. That's what lives in my head these days.

I guess the beta needs to be betta, eh? Thanks for the update. Makes me wonder, Why HTML? I use Pages, which lets me export to PDF and EPUB. Works good, I guess, but I haven't tried to publish anything.

Hi and welcome to the site. Your analysis above is more thorough than mine was of other sites. I came aboard on this site back in 2005, got great help on my submissions and made good friends. Some of the best stuff I've ever read has been on this site. I left the site for about 15 years to live the next phase of my memoir, researched a few sites after writing a few more books, and decided to come back here.

Good ol' Sol  (our higher power of the site) was kind enough to save all my data and my points, for which I'm grateful. This site is an off-site backup for me as well as a source for feedback. Really, you can't lose by joining up.

That said, there's lots to choose from here. Dig in, enjoy, be honest, be impressed, be inspired, learn a lot, laugh a fair amount, help others, make friends and above all, keep writing.

whatta

Me too. I think Dirk summed up this thread accurately, though. It's more about the (debatable) use of the A-eye tool. Feels like a homogenization of writing would be the result of "written by A-eye" stories.

Just to note, I submitted my five part series with 6 different pdfs: 1 for each book (at 100 words summary each) and another for the entire series (in 500 words). It was interesting to see the difference. There were several instances in the 100-word summaries where some details weren't accurate. Additionally, while it named some characters, it never once mentioned the name Gulliver. Some part of that may have been affected by adding "and the further travels of Gulliver" to the title after I had already made the pdfs. Maybe I'll run it through again and see if it notices.

I should also mention that it didn't give the last book, (a novel at 103,000 words) and imo the whole crux of the biscuit, the attention it deserves. For me, the denouement is a large factor in determining how good I think a story is. (I weigh the style of writing heavier than the storyline. It can have a crap ending if the style carries me. I'm looking at you, Tolstoy. See also: Bukowski, whose endings were just another day in his life.) A-eye doesn't value the denouement with any amount of preference (or, shall we say, emotion).

Also of note: I resubmitted Book 1 by itself and it referenced details from the other books! That's kinda unnerving. It's A-eye-and-ear, in actuality, by definition, I guess.

Anywho, I'm just collecting snippets and putting them together with some suggestions from a pro on the site and editing (read: muddling) my way through to some sort of perfect query letter for two books (Street of Rogues, a 3-volume memoir which includes Tropical Cancer, and the Noble Book of Lindsay the Tall &...). Sad to note: I've actually worked longer on the 'perfect' query letter for Street... than I have on the book.

And I'm totally with all of us here on this thread; the idea of stylistically homogenous books generated by an average of "norms" is horrifying -- Orwellian, even. I like to think, in my optimistic way, that creative, unique, and ground-breaking writing will continue to find a place with courageous publishers.

Carry on,
whatta

That would be: A-eye-eh?-eye-Oh!

I told it to summarize the book in 500 words and uploaded a pdf with all three books in it.

About AI reviews:

Will AI read one chapter of a book and advise me helpfully about arc, plot or character development? I don’t see how that’s possible, so it’ll be a very limited, narrow review. Can it tell me if my story is “good”?

About AI writing books:

Can AI be creative and unique? Can it describe epiphanies, revelations, sympathy, empathy and emotions? Does AI have talent or creativity? Can it rant?

Frankly, the idea of using AI to write a book sickens me. It removes the unique artist and replaces it with a conglomeration of stored talent, grammatical rules and traditional structure.

I’m with you on this, Vern. AI generated stories may eventually overwhelm human talent. And I’m definitely with you, Dirk. How many ground-breaking, unique classics would have made it by the AI reviews? Ulysses, Gulliver’s Travels, Tropic of Cancer, etc, etc, etc…

However, I can see it making a manuscript easier to read. It’s a cheat, for sure, replacing human talent, but helpful in that regard. I guess it could replace human editors, which is a depressing notion if you’re a pro editor.

We don’t have much choice but to live with this “progress.”