This is the final section in my December 2024 What’s New in Publishing series. If you are just joining at this point, you may wish to go back and read the other two parts.
Part 1 looked at the rapid change in the publishing world
and some of the psychological and technological impacts it’s had on writers.
Part 2 looked at AI technology specifically. The choices one
can make at each step of the writing and publishing process, and how things
work when choosing an AI solution.
Picture licensed from DepositPhotos
THE AI ETHICS DISCUSSION
First, it is important to explain the difference between Ethics and Morals. They are tied together for an individual, but not necessarily for a group of people.
Ethics are rules of conduct adopted by a recognized group of people and recognized by an external source or social system. An easy example is medical ethics are created by doctors and recognized by their licensing board. Legal ethics are created by lawyers and recognized by their licensing board. Writers who belong to guilds (The Authors Guild or The Society of Authors, or The Alliance of Independent Writers) or other recognized groups agree to follow a set of rules set down by the organization. It’s not quite as disciplinary as for doctors or lawyers. One can still write without belonging, but it is harder particularly if you work in an industry that only looks at works from certain membership groups.
Is there an external recognized group that can stop a person or a company (e.g. AI Software Company) from creating AI that breaks an ethical code? Not to my knowledge. There are those who press congress to make laws based on individual morals but they have been completely impotent in convincing social media platforms to accept any responsibility. To my knowledge there is not currently an AI licensing board that decides who can create AI or what ethics must be in place.
The other two signposts in the picture above,
Integrity and Respect, are also a part of my moral principles. In the case of
AI use I believe if one uses it, it should be made public in the material. That
may be something as simple as labeling images as to its licensing or AI use,
and the same with writing, narrating, and translating. Or it may be as involved
as writing a blog post, like I’ve done here.
Licensed from DepositPhotos, author Phonlamal
Ethics Around How AI Databases Are Populated
As discussed briefly in
Part 1, there is a lot of discussion, and a number of lawsuits around
generative AI for writing and for image creation. The lawsuits are primarily concerned
with how the AI was trained, how the database of stories and art was created.
We know for it was created by ingesting images, articles, magazines, novels,
short stories, nonfiction books, etc. In some cases, the images and written
work were under public domain (books where the copyright has expired). In
others it was work that was in creative commons licensing with no parameters.
Unfortunately, in many cases it involved “scraping” the Internet for all
written work. That would, of course, also include written work that might be
posted illegally. The reality is because it is on the Internet does NOT mean it
is without copyright protection. Quite the opposite in fact. Every blog post,
marketing copy, portion of a story, or an entire book on the internet carries
copyright protection unless the author specifies it is open for taking and
without the need for attribution.
If you are fascinated by all this legal stuff (which I am) here are some links to get you started as to the discussions, the current findings, and the difficulty of deciding this.
Copyright Alliance summary of several lawsuits
Reuters discussion of AI and the law difficulties for images, written work, and even the code itself
U.S. Copyright Office current statement on AI and copyright.
The Authors Guild current lawsuit status and negotiations with big publishers around AI ingestion and author rights for compensation.
For me, having copyright of my work is required. It is the only thing standing between me and anyone / anything that would take it and use it as their own. In the U.S. fighting a copyright infringement lawsuit can be difficult and expensive, but it all begins with registering my copyright. Without that registration, there is little to no chance of me being able to fight when my rights are infringed.
AI Will Put People Out of Work. I hear this a lot. There is no doubt some jobs replaced by AI will mean those jobs won’t exist anymore, except in very expensive bespoke instances with private contracts. That is reality.
When I first got out of college with my bachelor’s degree. I worked in grant-funded jobs counseling individuals who lost their jobs due to technology changes or simply a company (usually a small company) going out of business because it could no longer compete in the marketplace. I remember when lumber mills all over southern Oregon shut down in the 1980s. People who worked in those mills had fathers and grandfathers and great grandfathers who worked in the same mill before them. People who were loggers had the same lineage for working outdoors in the logging industry. They knew nothing else. Young people following in father’s and grandfather’s footsteps had never sought higher education because they made good money doing that work, often better money than those working in a corporate environment at a desk. They particularly didn’t want jobs that took them away from being outside. They couldn’t stomach the idea of sitting in cubicles inside a building all day.
Grants helped to retrain people for jobs that were available and many took advantage of that. But, in the end, some people refuse those jobs. They don’t adapt and they suffer greatly.
Robots welding in car manufacturing.
Photo licensed from DepositPhotos. Photo by microlga
Does knowing that some people lost their jobs permanently stop you from buying a car? What about a lot of the food we purchase? Most of that food now is grown on corporate farms and processed in corporate assembly lines enhanced by AI to do specific jobs that used to be done by humans. Do you only buy food from small local farmers? Do you only buy from small, family run grocery stores?
Even purchasing a book
on any online platform means AI is being used to do many things that humans
used to do—from marketing the book to you, suggesting other books, using
technology to literally assemble the book in the printing process from the
cover, the interior pages, putting it altogether and stacking it and
warehousing it. All of that process uses AI technology and cuts down on the
number of workers that were previously needed. Where in that process do you
draw the line? Do you only buy books made by hand and sold direct to you by the
writer? Or is it, you don’t buy online, you only buy from your local
family-owned bookstore?
Whenever I hear the suggestion that someone will not use AI or won’t purchase an AI-assisted product, I wonder how many other products they already purchase that use AI but it isn’t stated anywhere. What is the dividing line?
I know there are people who have a moral code that eschews most modern living. The Amish are a good example of that. Though it is not the way I would choose to live my life, I admire people who know exactly who they are and live in that way even though to the rest of us the sacrifices are mighty.
Moral choices are sometimes easy. But most of the time, living in a complex world with a lot I can’t control it is not easy. This is one of those times. The easy way would be for me to say, I won’t touch AI period. Of course that means giving up my formatting software, my video editing software, all of my social media, my graphics software. I don’t feel that strongly about it to do that.
Okay, just giving up generative AI. Is that the easy moral answer? I’m not sure. I believe that some generative AI is already so ingrained and the jobs already shifting that my sacrifice would mean nothing. Business will move on, and people will adapt. Then I will be the one who failed to adapt with my writing business.
For me living without any generative AI completely, is not a decision I’m willing to make. I’m not saying everything that has happened is good or was done properly. (Is it ever?). As I said the horse has escaped, closing the barn door now does nothing. For me, it is better to advocate for changes moving forward instead of trying to get people to go back into the barn and then build a much stronger door. Today’s society is far too intertwined and global for me to believe that by retreating from the world I will make a difference.
The question I must ask myself is: am I responsible for that job loss? By choosing to use AI in any way myself, am I contributing to that job loss AND does that contribution mean that AI will no longer be used? As to if I’m responsible for that job loss, I admit I struggle with that. I do believe that everything I do has a consequence. Things I support may cause someone else to support it. Things I don’t support may cause someone else to not support it. I don’t think I control someone’s job choice or ability to work. My career in academia and in counseling have showed me my ability to help is in adaptation, seeing what the world is like and finding a way to survive and thrive anyway. I can help people adapt if they wish to.
In the case of AI in publishing, writing, and art, I already see a number of the people embracing it to enhance their own productivity in those very jobs we think would be taken away. I spoke with a translator who admitted he uses AI for the initial translation of the written work and then reads it carefully to catch the mistakes or places where it needs a human touch to enhance the meaning, or to render the sentence in a way that addresses the culture of that language. He started using Google translate when it first came out. He even helped by providing better translations so the system would learn. He saw how that tool would allow him to work faster, which means he can take on more work and make more money. For others it isn’t only about making more money. It is also time efficiency, so they can have more time not working.
The same story goes for a number of graphic artists. They are excited to use AI to create the image they, or their client wants and it is an “original” image not seen on every book cover. They no longer need to maintain subscriptions to numerous expensive stock photo companies. Instead, they pay a subscription to one AI image building company. If you look for graphic designers particularly in places like Fiverr or Upwork, you will see many having different pricing tiers. One for art using stockphotos, one for an original drawing/painting, and one for using AI.
WHAT HAVE I DECIDED FOR MYSELF AND AI USE?
I will continue to use assistive technology that I’ve always used like spell-checkers. I will also take advantage of new technologies that helps me create my own database of information like my series bibles and book bibles.
Generative AI for Writing
I will not use generative AI for writing because my process doesn’t fit with that at all. I’m a pantser. In other words, I don’t use plot outlines, advanced character studies, or beat sheets to plan my story in advance. That means I can’t write any good prompts to help me write the story. For me, the joy of writing is letting the story unfold as the characters are presented with a problem and then go about figuring out how to solve it and get what they want or need.
My way of creating stories taps into all my personal experiences and the people I’ve known to form a completely unique story that is true to me and my purpose. If I need brainstorming help, I have developed a group of writers that I trust and can ask for help. It is rare I do that because I really do want my characters to get out of it themselves by tapping into my subconscious and moving forward. It is only when my characters get stuck in a corner and I can’t help them, that I share the problem with others. J
Would I use AI to analyze the beats and plot and character development after the fact? I won’t say never. But at the moment I love my editor. I think she’s much better, deeper, and more experienced than any AI could be. More than catching typos or grammar, she is very good at telling me where the emotion could be amped up or taken down a level. She’ll always mark where descriptions are too much or I need more. If I have too much filler and not enough forward movement she tells me, as well as if I’m moving forward too quickly. She can tell me if the black moment had enough leadup and was believable; and if the climax was truly climactic. She can keep the entire book in her head and know if by the end I met the promise I made to the reader in the beginning.
I don’t think AI can do that, because it is unemotional. It simply follows rules and makes connections to the way others have already done it. My editor knows more than the rules. She is a reader and she knows how the book makes her feel. And likely would make other people feel. She knows if the problems and resolutions are satisfying. She knows if, by the end of the book, she will be clamoring for the next book. Even more than that she knows my style of writing, my passions, my purpose, and she respects that. She doesn’t try to make me into someone else. She simply tries to make my writing the best and most satisfying me I can be. I don’t think AI can do that.
AI Narration for Audiobooks
Again, where the technology is today, I don’t see me using AI for this. Because I write character-driven stories with a lot of emotion, I don’t think AI can do this—at least not without a lot of tweaking along the way which is time consuming. I’ve loved the narrators I’ve used in the past and I get great reviews from listeners. Is it costly? Yes, but audiobooks are also 20-25% of my income and if I can’t get a good narrator, I’d do it myself before using AI.
If, the ability to clone my voice and my emotion and most of what I. could offer reading it myself becomes easy, I would likely use it. I would not license my voice for other use, but I would use it for me. Ten minutes instead of 30 hours to get my book read in my voice? Sounds great to me.
I might use AI for nonfiction, if it didn’t sound too much the same. My nonfiction is for teaching facts and procedures. Consequently, the emotional piece isn’t so important. I haven’t made that decision yet. I’ve also thought of narrating my nonfiction myself.
AI Images for my covers
No again on this. As far as I’m concerned, my cover designer is reasonably priced and stock photos are plentiful. She is able to tweak my covers as needed. For shorter works, I’m fine with doing the covers myself. So far, my cover designs have not had any negative bearing on sales.
I feel confident in my covers and I don’t want to look like everyone else. I want to fit into the genre of my stories, but I don’t want my books to have a cover that may not be EXACTLY like another cover, but that is indistinguishable from most of the covers in that genre. Of course, people do that now with stock photos (man chest anyone?)
AI Translation
Yes, I have decided I will do this. When I learned that a number of translators were using AI themselves to start their project and then correcting it, it didn’t make sense that I should pay those high prices when I could do the AI part and then hire a proofer/fixer to check and correct it.
In fact, I’ve contracted with a proof-reader for my Forest People fantasy series of books I want to put out in German. I’m using AI to translate to German. She will then proof it and make corrections as needed. I was honest with her that I was using AI translation and that I knew I needed a native language speaker to check it for me and make it better. She indicated that is 90% of the work she gets now and she has positioned her business to take advantage of that. The cost to me is 1/10th of the cost to have someone translate from scratch.
I do know authors who use AI for translation and don’t use a proofreader. They put it up as is. Though they occasionally get a reviewer pointing out a word or phrase that was wrong, it doesn’t seem to make a big difference in sales.
Again, this is a matter of balancing quality and finances for me. I want the best translation I can afford. I can either afford to put books into audio OR to do translation from scratch. At this juncture I believe the audio investment has more return than translations. Therefore, this solution works for me with a small investment to make the AI translation better. We will see, this is an experiment.
I’m looking to balance better productivity with more writing time, while keeping my morals in the right place and my business practices reflecting that. It is a high-wire act without the wire. We’ll see whether I fall to my doom, get stuck in never-land, or perhaps enjoy a life with better balance and a few joyous sky dancing moments. J
END QUOTES TO CONSIDER
Everybody gets so much information all day long that they lose their common sense.— Gertrude Stein
The real problem is not whether machines think but whether men do.—B. F. Skinner
Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history. Unfortunately, it might also be the last, unless we learn how to avoid the risks.—Stephen Hawking
I hope this three-part series (yes, way too long) has at
least got you to think about the role of technology in your life, the shifting
of publishing, and where you want to position yourself for the future. I’d love
to hear from you if you want to share your views.
Happy Reading, Writing, Loving, Living! ~ Maggie Lynch
No comments:
Post a Comment