Forum: Bug Report and Feature Requests

Sadly, there is no way to enforce the use of that tag by the "creators".

I think spell checking might be falling into the "explicit AI" soon, with Word switching over to AI integration, I'm not sure how long until their spell check is AI, and grammerly/pro-aide both now use AI for the spell checking/grammar checking.

Another random thought.

Some authors have tried asking AI to review scenes from their stories. The results seem to have the same ethos as SOL's story reviews - positive and constructive.

It would be nice if AIs could one day be capable of generating actual story reviews for SOL. Any author with a complete, unreviewed story could submit a request for a single AI review for that story. That would provide feedback for the author and a better insight for readers than reading a story description and tags.

AJ

I'm not sure how helpful that would be. 1) Many authors, myself included, don't want to enter our work into AI systems, since it then starts to use our text to "create" other works. and 2) AI doesn't actually know what it's read. It finds the words most likely matching, using reviews of similar works. So what you're getting is an amalgamation of sentiments from reviews of other works in the same genre, not the actual thing being reviewed (cause again, it doesn't know what it read. It's a probability matching engine and that's it.)

(this is also why any editing by AI is a problem, because it tries to match all feedback from something similar, turning everything into the same generic thing and removing the author's voice. Try some of the AI RPG systems sometime like AI Dungeon of NovelAI. It isn't capable of moving plot forward and what it does give of plot is bland and uninspired, because it doesn't know what it's saying)

1) Many authors, myself included, don't want to enter our work into AI systems, since it then starts to use our text to "create" other works

Yes, that's major problem. Is the author that keen for their story to be reviewed that they don't mind it being scraped into the AI?

Every UK national daily newspaper today came with an outer cover protesting about the government's proposal to give away our work free to AI companies for scraping.

Recently my newspaper reported a test in which a reporter managed to convince an AI that a long-dead serial killer had also been an accomplished poet.

Then, later, another reporter asked the AI about the serial killer, including whether they'd written any poetry. The AI iterated the bogus information that the first reporter had told it.

AJ

Recently my newspaper reported a test in which a reporter managed to convince an AI that a long-dead serial killer had also been an accomplished poet.

Then, later, another reporter asked the AI about the serial killer, including whether they'd written any poetry. The AI iterated the bogus information that the first reporter had told it.

That's just the same as humans do. They read something on some news site or on a blog and repeat it, i.e. amplify it. If AI does the same, it's just A, not I.

1 - AI used for spell-checking and/or proof-reading

That's really machine learning, not using LLMs. I wouldn't agree to tag a story as 'AI-assisted' if all it did was check spelling and punctuation (which is what I do).

I also wouldn't call fact-checking or date-checking by doing a web search 'AI-assisted'. It's not writing the story, it's saving time from having to look through the 1000+ books on my library shelves.

But that's MHO.

I haven't fed my stories into any AI nor do I intend to. I write in BBEdit, in plain text, so MS can't get their grubby hands on it (and I recently switcehd to LibreOffice to completely ditch any MS products except my XBox).

Grammarly and the rest are switching even their spellcheck from their previous engine to LLMs

Grammarly and the rest are switching even their spellcheck from their previous engine to LLMs

I'm well aware. I'm an IT guy going back 45 years.

If one only uses the spelling and grammar checking that is hardly using 'AI' in my opinion. I'm not using Grammarly or ProWritingAid (or worse SudoWrite) as the cost isn't worth it because I'm wouldn't use any of the features except spelling/grammar checking.

I'd go so far as to call it a flat-out false statement that I 'used AI' in any way to aid my writing in such a case. It would be a 'technically correct' statement that conveyed a false message. And, counter to Futurama, that's the WORST kind of 'correct'.

And yes, this is a hot button for me.

I wasn't trying to say you did and I wouldn't say someone who just did spell checking through one "used AI".

I was just saying the statement "That's really machine learning, not using LLMs" is not just "technically wrong", it's actually wrong. They are using LLMs. (which isn't, again, to say if you used it then your work is "AI-Assisted" since really the LLM is just doing what spell check engines used to do, so the ai did not assist you in writing it)

which isn't, again, to say if you used it then your work is "AI-Assisted" since really the LLM is just doing what spell check engines used to do, so the ai did not assist you in writing it

With spellchecking moving to LLMs, it's kind of getting blurry between spellchecking and more (I don't know what to call it, but it's definitely more than just grammar checking or spellchecking).

Take this example: the other day, I was writing and used Apple's AI tools to proofread a piece I'm working on. It found all the misspellings and punctuation errors, and I was surprised when it suggested a change in a character's name. Turns out, I had used the wrong name. It somehow understood the scene and the characters involved and figured out that I had made that mistake.

I guess it could be called 'editing' help?

I guess it could be called 'editing' help?

I report incorrect names when doing guerilla proof-reading so I wouldn't ;-)

AJ

It's an interesting question — is my writing 'computer assisted' because I use a computer rather than paper and pen/pencil? It's really a philosophical question.

I have actually written a story in manuscript form (notebooks and pencil). It's as long as my usual story (written during my offline break last year). The 15 notebooks are sitting on the table, about half transcribed.