• 0 Posts
  • 34 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 25th, 2023

help-circle
  • Technically all Christians have a version of this. Though even in “Bible Churches” it is usually tempered by the second bit below, and processes of repentance and whatnot.

    9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[c] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

    12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”

    I Corinthians 5

    15 “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

    Matthew 18

    As an aside, that Corinthians bit spells it out in plain-ass English that any “Christian” screaming at non-Christians about being gay, trans, or whatever either do not know their Bible or only use it when it supports the actions they already want to take.

    As a second aside, it is kind of funny what one still remembers even after being out of the church for a couple decades.














  • Thank you for the response. I am not sure I agree with your exact stance, but you make several compelling points along the way.

    Using the Fair Use doctrine is definitely a good way to narrow down where the dividing line is. I think we can easily agree that making a GRRM specific AI to make derivative, non-parody, commercial works would definitely be on the wrong side of the line.

    When I was picturing the bots, I was picturing something more along the lines of AI bots that had consumed all human literary works, or at the very least all modern English literary works.

    ChatGPT write me a short story where the Main Character is a Magical Golem that follows the Three Laws of Isaac Asimov. It should be written in the style of a Greek Tragedy but set in Feudal Japan. The Main Character should be able to gain in magical power until he eventually attempts to break into the Heavens. There should be gods trying to interfere in his ascension but not in ways the MC cannot resolve. Base the gods off of archetypes from Norse Mythology, but name them after characters from GRRM’s game of thrones based on similar personality types.

    Such a work would both be wholly derivative and yet wholly unique. Despite swiping GRRM’s unique names this work should be perfectly fine in my mind. Edit: Even if it was commercialized.


  • Like the other commenter, I would be genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on that fundamental difference.

    I am by no means an AI expert, but my impressions is that AI sill needs to process each book and incorporate the new knowledge into its existing knowledge. Which at least from a surface level sounds a lot like what I do when I read a new book.

    The fact that each AI is effectively a non-sapient slave of a person or corporation really doesn’t change my opinion.

    Have you ever had a reason to read much in a new or developing sub-genre? As a fan of LitRPG, a genre that virtually didn’t exist 10 years ago, I can tell you with some certainty that everything is a derivative work of something. It is amazing how as soon as one author pulls in and idea from another genre, the next 30 novels that come out will have some variation of the same idea, and the 300 that follow it will each have variations of those.



  • I am with the authors more like 80% here.

    Authors read each others works and are influenced by them and we don’t expect them to go back and buy special licenses for each work that might have influenced their current novels. Art as much as any field stands on the shoulders of mice and giants alike. Pretending that AI language models shouldn’t “read” as many novels as possible to assist their own growth is a preposterous idea.

    Should they have to buy a copy of the book like everyone else? Sure. Should they get bent over without lube by publishing companies? Well that is a bit more complex.

    In my opinion there is no “right” answer right now. We as a society need to decide what we are okay with.

    Furthermore, there are a lot of really good books out there that would be truly great “except”. Except what? That depends. Maybe it has annoying side characters, or maybe it is littered with plot holes, maybe there are outdated social norms that distract from the real point of the book, or maybe the fact that not one character in the book looks or talks like you and your friends.

    It would be wonderful if we could use AI to adjust or even personalize those books.

    Can you imagine a Harry Potter that isn’t just translated into other languages, but has each of the characters localized as well. Neither Harry Potter being British nor being male is fundamental to the story. There is no reason the French, Aria Potter couldn’t save the world through the power of her mother’s love, and with the help of her friends. Well except the fact that it would likely make JKR lose her mind, since she doesn’t even tolerate fan fiction.

    Is it possible to make these changes now, sure? It just isn’t really practical for even really big name authors, much someone who only sells a few thousand copies of each book.