Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

KillianDrake t1_j9i06gw wrote

I don't understand what the problem is, they should be glad to receive so many new entries. Just continue to read them and pick the best ones and publish them. Too many? Overwhelming? Utilize an AI to read and categorize them for you so you end up with a filtered amount similar to your previous workload.

All that matters is the best content gets published, regardless of who wrote it or how they wrote it. I mean, it's no different than an author who reads Game of Thrones and then decides to publish a novel using the same character-per-chapter format and themes but with new characters, events and environment... Oh wait, that was The Expanse!

−11

ego_bot t1_j9i3ozo wrote

You are underestimating how difficult it is for the editors to keep up with the volume of submissions. Between minimal staff (volunteer or otherwise) and already razor-thin profit margins, submissions rocketing with entirely garbage AI submissions is a difficulty magazines can't really afford.

In other words, the AI submissions are not the best content. Not even close. They are simply muddying the waters and making it harder for the editors to find the good human stuff because they have that many more documents to open, that many more submissions to reject, that many more accounts to ban. It's just spam.

As for the AI to sort and filter out the AI-generated submissions, the tech only has about a 50% success rate at the moment. The editor commented on this. It's simply not accurate enough at the moment.

13

KillianDrake t1_j9i4x9y wrote

Progress moves forward, old ways die off, adjust and adapt. Content is now cheaper to produce. If it's true that all AI content is trash, then people will ignore it and gravitate to the "real" stuff - but I think we all know, that's not actually true, and that people will gravitate to whatever is interesting and that's what scares the gatekeepers. What if the AI stuff is just as interesting as their own stuff? What happens to "me"? What if this is just temporary and in a few years, AI makes another leap forward? People will adjust and adapt and become better prompt writers and if they can direct the AI better than average, then they'll be fine.

−5

ego_bot t1_j9iuoq4 wrote

Valid points. Will be interesting to see what happens when the AI art is actually competent and enjoyable.

However, it seems to be that humans inherently enjoy something less if they know it has been generated by a program in a few seconds. There is no creative process, no soul, "a mockery of what it means to be human." The AI itself isn't even a thinking being, not even close (though one day that could change).

You are right about one thing. We will adapt, one way or another.

5