Wednesday, July 19, 2023

Will AI and GPT Make Writers Obsolete?

Is GPT Scarier than any of Edgar Allen Poe's Stories? 

 Recently, I have blogged about my concern for the impact of AI.  Until the recent edition of "The Authors Guild Bulletin" I had overlooked the impact of AI on professional writers, but Professional writers in Hollywood are already aware of the impact on their livelihoods and have joined other strikers to seek protection from being replaced by AI.  

Recently, the Executive Director of the Authors Guild interviewed the founder of a company providing GPT for writers.  After reading this blog, you may want to google GPT to find a more detailed description; however, my simple explanation is that GPT is an artificial intelligence that can process our natural human language and generate a response.  What is significant about GPT for authors is whether the art of writing will eventually displace the need for authors.  The striking writers in Hollywood have already recognized the threat.

However, some authors see AI positively, using it as an aid rather than a threat.  For example, Al can assist with word selection or composing a description.  GPT can provide ideas in each of the five senses.  I sometimes use my dog-eared 'Roget's Thesaurus. to find the exact word I want, so GPT could help in that way, but it goes a lot further than just finding the best word.  It can also help a writer create characters and outline story structures.  The more I read, the more I could imagine a future in which  authors become nearly unnecessary, reduced to prompters.  

The man being interviewed used the calculator as an example of how something new may seem disruptive of tradition and norms, but once implemented becomes quickly accepted.  Children may still learn the multiplication tables, he explained, but with calculators on smart phones, few of us rely on our grade school memory to do calculations.  

Another example is the impact of cell phone cameras.  Professional photographers have not disappeared entirely, but most people are satisfied with their cell phone cameras, and taking snapshots and waiting for them to be developed to put into photo albums is uncommon.  

Near the end of the interview, the Guild interviewer asked whether he thought writers would become nearly extinct.  He answered that he believed there would always be a professional class of creators.  However, he predicts that as GPT is programed by having been feed the words of the world's greatest writers, the role of human authors will become more a matter of "training" GPT.  

As I write this blog, spell-check is warning me when I misspell words. That is a predecessor to loading massive collections of writings to educate or train the GPT to do what it does.  

With some writers already using GPT to help create characters and to help structure settings and describe scenes, the technology is racing ahead of the law, neglecting the issue of copyright and some kind of compensation to writers for the material with which they "train" the GPT.  Should it be forbidden for GPT to use copyrighted material?  Has that already happened?   Are writers who have begun using GPT helping to make themselves obsolete?  These questions are what the Hollywood writers have already recognized.

From the Interview, it appears that most of the GPT is currently used for fiction, especially science fiction and short stories.  However, the man being interviewed acknowledged that AI has proceeded without determining whether or not their actions exceed 'fair use.'  He admitted that from a pure ethical standpoint, authors should be compensated for using their work.  The interviewer agreed, asking how can the work of those writers, whose books and other material have already been used for training, be compensated?  Should authors have the right to refuse to allow their work to be used?  How long should copywrite protect authors?  As the old saying goes, 'Is it too late to shut the barn door once the horses are out?'  Perhaps those strikers in Hollywood are trying to round up the horses!

The man suggested that some kind of an automated collective licensing system should be developed to compensate authors, with some legislation licensing solution to get compensation back to the creators of the words already being downloaded.  Just how to make that happen hasn't been figured out.

Are our brilliant minds dashing forward, ignoring ethical issues and consequences?  Is it possible that this is not only a question of fair dealing but also a risk of using human intelligence so carelessly that we are making ourselves obsolete? ( P.S.  I had already written this blog before the strike, but I am glad to have it ready, with a few additions regarding the strike, to share this information that may help explain why the Hollywood writers are concerned. )

No comments: