icon caret-left icon caret-right instagram pinterest linkedin facebook twitter goodreads question-circle facebook circle twitter circle linkedin circle instagram circle goodreads circle pinterest circle



Reader . . . Be Aware!

In his Grammar Moses column on April 8th, Jim Baumann challenged his readers to a test:  Determine which one of two blurbs on gerunds was written by the artificial application ChatGPT and which was written by him. (The AI version took forty-one seconds to create; Baumann's took five minutes).


If readers were expecting the choice would be easy . . . well, they'd have to think again. 


In his follow-up column the next week, Bauman gave examples where readers (even some of his most ardent followers) were fooled. Most readers felt the AI version was adolescent, lacked variability in sentence structure, and tried too hard to interject humor.


In academic circles (think student papers, professor's articles, graduate student theses) and among professionals (think bloggers, attorneys, journalists), valid concerns about the use of AI are raised—who is the real author writing those papers, blogs, and articles? And where do the facts, assumptions, and conclusions come from?


Beyond these worries, how might the use of AI impact the literary field in fiction and non-fiction works? Will readers be able to tell between works generated by artificial intelligence and those written by (human) authors?


The increasing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in literature has raised several concerns among scholars, writers, and readers alike. While AI can undoubtedly offer innovative tools and new creative possibilities, it also presents certain challenges and risks.


One primary concern is the potential loss of human creativity and authorship. Literature has long been considered a reflection of the human experience, emotions, and imagination. Critics argue that AI-generated literature lacks the genuine human touch and the unique perspective that comes from lived experiences and emotions. AI systems may mimic existing works or follow established patterns, but they struggle to create truly original, authentic narratives.


Another worry revolves around the ethical implications of AI-generated literature. As AI systems learn from existing texts, there is a risk of perpetuating biases, stereotypes, or discriminatory content. If an AI model is primarily trained on works that reflect certain cultural or social biases, it may unknowingly reproduce and amplify those biases in its own output, leading to skewed representations and reinforcing existing inequalities.


Additionally, the question of intellectual property and ownership arises. Who should be credited as the author when an AI system generates a literary work? This dilemma blurs the boundaries of copyright law and raises complex legal and ethical questions.


Lastly, there is a concern that AI-generated literature might devalue the human creative process. If AI systems become proficient at producing literature, it could potentially flood the market with an overwhelming amount of content, making it difficult for human authors to gain recognition and financial sustainability.


While AI offers exciting possibilities for literary exploration, addressing these concerns is crucial to ensure that the essence of human creativity, diversity, and authorship are not compromised in the process.


* * *

So, who wrote this blog? 

ChatGPT generated all the text beginning with: The increasing use of artificial intelligence . . . .   So, Reader Be Aware!

Be the first to comment