I think there’s an enormous difference between using AI in the background to help you flesh out a setting or character, and using AI to actually write content. The nature of AI, as most of us non-coders will experience it, is a commercial program that uses the Internet to source its output. AI is not capable (at least not yet) of thinking creatively. It responds to a series of parameters, and it isn’t concerned with where it gets its response as much as with the level of conformity to the parameters.
Eight million years ago, before we all had an inkling that the Internet would exist and when we still typed on manual typewriters, in a freshman writing class, we were asked to write an essay. The professor had made a point of mentioning a book he wrote (several times) in the course of the discussion on what we were expected to write. So, I went to the library and took out his book, read it, and wrote my essay in his voice. I used the same sentence compositions, vocabulary, and style of presentation. I did not use any of his actual writing, merely copied his style of writing. And as a result, I got an A+ for the semester, and was recommended to work on the school paper in lieu of having to take his class. Had I been an AI, i would most likely have included actual sentences or sentence fragments cribbed from his book, but as a human, I knew better.
Do I think AI could finish GRR’s book? Absolutely not. AI isn’t capable of the human touch. It doesn’t understand emotions, or even physicality. It’s not a “real” writer despite its alleged sophistication. It’s a good tool if used in the background, but not more than that.