Note: This article may become obsolete as the technological landscape evolves. This is a manifesto that can work now but may not be realistic in a year. Should my opinion change on the ethics of using AI, I will write a new article.
Introduction
Yet another heatwave here in Montreal, and so I've remained in my bedroom where it's cool, with my AC turned on. As is tradition, I've wasted my life away on Reddit. This time, however, I've found a new subreddit which I found interesting, if somewhat quiet. r/WritingWithAI/ usually takes the pro-AI stance against the purist in the extremely polarized debate of whether AI in writing is ethical or not. On the other hand, r/Writing seems more reserved about the technology.
No matter which side of the Reddit depths I find myself lurking, everyone ponders the same question. As an avid technology and AI enthusiast, a writer who sometimes struggles with grammar, and a person who prides himself on seeking a middle ground, I wanted to propose a framework for how much AI assistance is ethical.
Note that this is only my perspective. While I have thought about this considerably and would not refine it without sufficiently good arguments, I invite anyone to comment and propose changes.
Manifesto
Preserve human agency: AI should never replace humans in decision-making. AI is here to assist, not replace.
Creativity from the human: Current AI systems do not exhibit human-like creativity. (Edit: However, the potential for future systems to develop some form of creative capabilities cannot be entirely ruled out.) To maintain the integrity and depth of creative works, plot, ideas, and dialogue should primarily originate from the user.
Learn from every interaction: The user should strive to learn from every AI interaction and gain additional expertise until AI is no longer helpful.
Efficiency, not replacement: AI should primarily be used to facilitate tasks that the user could do just as well, but wishes to save time.
Value human expertise: If the means are available (financial and otherwise), hire a human for their expertise instead of relying on AI.
Credit where credit is due: Do not take credit for content primarily generated by AI. The user should aim for under 10% of AI-generated content.
Ethical intent: Do not use AI with the intent to deceive, misinform, or otherwise engage in unethical practices.
Dos
Use AI for spellcheck
Use AI for suggestions on how to refine sentences
Use AI to bounce ideas off of
Use AI to get feedback
Use AI to learn about writing techniques
Use AI to assist you in research
Don't
Post work that had significant AI-generated content without disclaiming it
Post AI-generated content without reviewing it first
Rely on AI as a replacement for creativity and plot planning
Human Creativity
AI can emulate creativity by mixing concepts present in other creative works, and these combinations can yield unexpected results. In a way, this is a form of creativity, and some experts, such as Margaret Boden, seem to agree. Human creativity, however, draws from a broader and more diverse range of inspirations, some of which may be completely unrelated to creative writing. For instance, my short story "Reality for Sale" was partly inspired by a dream after listening to Metallica's "Master of Puppets" before sleeping. Sadly, as previously mentioned, AI does not dream of electric sheep.
Returning to AI, one could argue that its "creativity" is not true creativity; to oversimplify, it emerges from patterns learned from training data and a bit of randomness, rather than from a deliberate and intuitive effort to uniquely blend disparate concepts. Depending on your moral values, this distinction may or may not be crucial. While creativity is likely one of the few human attributes AI will never fully replicate, some argue that as long as the end result is impactful and marketable, the origin of creativity does not matter. I hold a different view, prioritizing the 'purity' of creative expression, but acknowledge this as a subjective stance. However, objective concerns exist that warrant attention.
One major issue is the potential for a feedback loop that could diminish AI's ability. Once your work is published and recognized, it may be used to train future AI models. Repeating this cycle could lead AI to become over-reliant on its previous outputs, hindering its ability to generate truly novel content.
Additionally, consider why we might need AI-created books at all. With over 500,000 books published annually, is there really a shortage of human-created literature? Many talented authors struggle to gain visibility in an oversaturated market. If you aspire to contribute to the literary world but lack traditional creative skills, there are other valuable roles to consider. For instance, if you excel in prose, editing might suit you. If you have a deep understanding of writing techniques, teaching could be your calling. Or, if you are particularly opinionated, a career in literary criticism could be rewarding.
Finally, if your goal is financial success, it's crucial to recognize that achieving wealth akin to J.K. Rowling's through writing is highly unlikely given the fierce competition. Leveraging AI in other domains might offer quicker and easier financial gains without the need to create a novel.
Human Expertise
An acquaintance once stated that AI creates a barrier of entry that prevents mediocrity. I've pondered this for quite some time and have journeyed through several stances on this opinion. Initially, I was mildly upset, interpreting it as an implication that AI users are inherently mediocre, which I disagreed with. Then, upon flipping the perspective, I found myself in agreement: indeed, any novice can significantly enhance their productivity or the quality of their work by relying on superior AI tools.
However, my recent reflections have led me to realize the complete opposite is true. AI does not create a shield against mediocrity; rather, it encourages it. Reflecting on my honeymoon phase with ChatGPT-3.5, I, too, fell into the trap of over-relying on AI. It's easy to think we have produced something of notable worth because it looks better than anything we could have crafted alone.
But the truth is simple: just as in any other field, experts will tell you that AI does some things very well, surpassing beginners, but it still lacks in areas requiring deep knowledge and subtle skills. (Edit: It has been accurately pointed out to me that in some specific domains, AI has shown capabilities that match or exceed human experts.) In creative writing, this often manifests as missing nuances in both plot and grammar — AI simply doesn't have the expertise (yet) to replace highly knowledgeable individuals who have dedicated years to mastering their craft.
There's also another dimension to consider. While it's easy to get caught up in debates about capitalism versus anti-capitalism, we must ask ourselves what we truly want from AI. If we use AI irresponsibly or become overly reliant on it, there's a potential risk worth considering: it could lead to a scenario where fewer individuals develop deep expertise in certain fields. This might result in a shortage of knowledgeable humans available for guidance or to further advance these fields.
However, I understand that not everyone may be concerned with the societal implications of AI. So, let's tackle more personal reasons. If experts are hypothetically rendered obsolete, then contributions from non-experts might become ten times as irrelevant. Having AI handle all the heavy lifting can cheapen the product's value because, as an author, your necessity diminishes. Creative writing is collaborative work. If you have the financial means and resources, hiring a professional not only enhances your final product but also benefits society at large.
Learn
One of the dangers of AI that I've grappled with personally is its potential to foster intellectual laziness. In my early encounters with AI, before I had established my own ethical guidelines for its use in my work, I would simply input my desired outcome and accept whatever it produced at face value. I didn't bother to try to understand the rationale behind its suggestions. Fortunately, I caught myself before anything of this sort went public, and I changed course. I believe it's crucial that we all do the same.
Humans naturally often seek the path of least resistance. If there's a way to save time, effort, and energy, our instincts might just lead us there. Even now, as I draft this article, I find myself eyeing ChatGPT, tempted to let it extrapolate my basic ideas and generate a full article while I call it a day and go play video games. Yet, if I surrendered to that impulse, I wouldn't learn anything, and the quality of my thoughts would deteriorate as my input became less refined.
While I still use ChatGPT to check for grammatical errors and suggest refinements, I critically approach its edits. I carefully consider why it proposes certain changes. If the adjustments are substantial, I take it upon myself to rework the problematic sections before running them through the AI again. This process has significantly enriched my vocabulary over the past year and boosted my confidence and control over my writing. Gradually, I've found myself relying on AI less frequently, achieving equally satisfying results on my own.
This method of learning from your interactions with AI is fundamentally an investment in yourself. It allows you to take greater ownership of your work. Moreover, should AI technology ever be scaled back — due to financial unsustainability of AI firms, as some reports suggest, or growing public and regulatory pushback — you won't find yourself unprepared. Cultivating and refining your skills independently ensures that you remain versatile and adaptable, regardless of how the technological landscape evolves.
AI is a tool
AI is to the creative writer what a sci-fi, sophisticated, high-tech screwdriver is to the construction worker. It is not meant to replace writers but should be used responsibly if we want to avoid our very own brand of dystopian future. AI serves as a repository of knowledge and can streamline the writing process. Any seasoned writer will tell you this career path is long, tedious, and often solitary. AI can alleviate some of these burdens but should never take full control. It should not be used to compensate for a lack of creativity. After all, building a house entirely out of screwdrivers isn't just impractical — it's impossible. Embrace your humanity, be authentic, and continuously commit to self-improvement.
This is a work in progress
I am not an expert by any means. I am simply a passionate individual with access to the internet who happens to be interested in both creative writing and AI technology. Do not consider this article as gospel; what works for me may not work for you. However, I urge you to consider taking a similar stance to avoid diminishing the value of human input while similarly acknowledging the benefits of AI collaboration.
Additionally, since AI is an extremely rapidly evolving field (both on a technological and societal level), it's very likely that I may have missed some points and will need to add to the "dos" or "don'ts" over time. If you have suggestions, please let me know so I may consider adding them!
Comments