Wilde_Guess

42019

42017

Mine are still at home. But, ‘company’ has shown up early, including an uncle that they hadn’t expected to show up.

41991

41987

41979

41973

Hi, Desiderius Price. In your example above, AI could be a tool to help an author. So could a beta reader/editor, with likely better results. Some less dubious “trickery” has been used in the past for circumstances like you’ve listed. However, AI is inherently untrustworthy, since by its very nature it will “taint” that actor/actress’s entire performance in that movie. It’s far better to edit the screenplay to downplay the dead performer’s character, or reshoot all the scenes that performer appeared in with a different performer. AI is already being used excessively to the detriment of real people, whether those people are the human creative people or the audience for which those people would otherwise perform. This says nothing about those cases where real people should/would not perform at all. Thanks.

Mine have returned home after a wedding reception and public music performance.

41971

Hi, BronxWench, Desiderius Price, and all. It’s behind the paywall. I’ll pay for a subscription to the NYT after they pay repartitions for their part and participation in the Holdomor, and no sooner. Desiderius Price, I agree with you on “grammatically perfect dialogue.” It’s also one of the things I have to watch in my own writing. While my grammar is by no means perfect, it is habitually quite good. So, I have to watch myself (with varying degrees of success) to not have my characters speak above their “linguistic weight.” Thanks.

Hello again, all. I didn’t actually try to answer the original question. Here’s my answer. Not just no, but fuck no. AI Deep Fakes are the antithesis of Fanfiction. AIs are not people and thus can’t admire genuine creativity; and many who would use AIs for such a purpose are little better. In my previous post, I mentioned the works of Robert Goldsborough. Those works were properly licensed in advance with the Rex Stout Estate, and were successfully published and critically received on their own merits. Ultimately, though, Goldsborough’s Nero Wolfe was the ultimate pinnacle of fanfiction—one that was so good that it went straight from the typewriter to the commercial editor, and then to the publisher and commercial success. Without the creativity and love Goldsborough (and his mother, whose love for Stout’s Wolfe inspired his efforts) had for Stout’s works, plus Goldsborough’s own talent and creativity, those seventeen (and counting) books would never have happened. AIs are neither talented or creative, thus an AI couldn’t possibly create anything good; here or elsewhere. Thanks.

Hi, BronxWench and all. I’m reasonably sure that that AI can not replace the editor or “beta-reader” process. In the end, we’re people writing to entertain other people, for the exact reasons you listed. The current crop of spelling/grammar checkers can’t even get things right on a consistent basis, particularly with any dialect of English. Any time one is creating a “derived work,” by whatever means, they need the permission or license of the original work’s owner and creator in order to sell the work. So, if the owner/creator of the original work denies permission, it’s game over, and it should be that. The talk about AI, whether in creating prose or music, reminds me of the slogan typically posted in every fourth grade classroom in the United States since I was a fourth grader, I.E. nine years old. “Just because you can doesn’t mean you should.” Finally, since AI lacks a soul, the very best it can create is a pale imitation of the original work. In the case of “continuing” a “story series” by a dead author, even real people with real talent have serious problems continuing a series without inevitably taking “ownership” of the later works in the series. All the “post-Conan-Doyle” Sherlock Holmes stories are out there, and quite a few of them are great. But they aren’t the works of Conan-Doyle, and could never pass for such. Likewise, the post-Flemming James Bond works could never pass for Flemming’s work. The authors who created the later works were not only not Ian Flemming, they were also so far removed from Flemming’s life experiences that they have no hope of truly creating a good true “James Bond” story. Flemming set his Bond stories in the time in which he was writing. That is, in the first near two decades after the end of World War Two. So, while the Broccolis were able to write (or have written) quite a few good Bond works, they weren’t Flemming’s, and could never pass for it. In the profoundly rare instances where an author can successfully continue a series work after the original author dies, it’s so much harder than they make it look. If you are familiar enough with the authors, you can still tell the difference more often than not, even while enjoying both the “original” and the “continued” series. The most obvious example here is Robert Goldsborough’s continuation of the Rex Stout Nero Wolfe series. Goldsborough has written seventeen full length stories in a style and quality near-identical to Stout’s forty-seven book (some books being double or triple novella in one volume) series. While “both halves” of the Nero Wolfe series are great reads for those who like whodunits, you can tell the difference between Goldsborough and Stout, beyond being familiar enough with the works to know in advance which author wrote each story. Goldsborough started writing Nero Wolfe for all the right reasons as well as to make money. He was a very good author before writing Murder in E Minor in 1986. But the post-1975 Nero Wolfe works, as good as they are, would never stand up to detailed scrutiny if Goldsborough had actually tried to pass them off as Rex Stout’s works. Goldsborough openly claimed at least for the first stories to be trying to work up to the standard where he could, even while never actually trying to. All this is from a talented real person, not a bot. AI will only deny livelihood to real authors in exchange for making truly garbage literature for those who either don’t know any better or are lied to. As an aside, even without AI/zombie bots in the mix, resurrecting an abandoned work that really existed is incredibly hard. Harper Lee’s Go Set a Watchman was already in the editing/rewriting process in the late 1950’s when her editors convinced her instead to create To Kill a Mockingbird from expanded versions of the flashbacks within Watchman fleshed out and stitched together. Mockingbird was a mammoth best seller and Pulitzer Prize winner. Lee never wrote another book, and for most of her life refused to take up finishing Watchman. At the very end of her life, a copy of her 1950s manuscript turned up, and she reluctantly gave in (others have claimed her consent was obtained under less honorable conditions) to having the work published, but was well beyond the ability to do any further work on Watchman at all. Thus, the people “cleaning up” Watchman for publication tried to “fix” it without Lee’s assistance. And in the end, despite Watchman having good bones, the book still read like what it was, I.E. a first draft that was poorly polished at best, and by people more interested in cashing in than they were providing an entertaining story. Thus, it received slightly favorable but mixed reviews. One example of “continuity” glaring enough to indirectly make it into Wikipedia (from the LA Times) was the winning of the trial (in Watchman) that Atticus Finch lost in Mockingbird. The Watchman we got was better than no Watchman at all. But it would have been so much better if Harper Lee had truly gone back to writing and polishing Watchman herself ten years or so earlier, when she still had the ability to fix it herself and bring it up the the same standard as Mockingbird. And even if someone tried to use an AI to “fix” Watchman, the end result would actually have been worse. In the end, whether we were ultimately created by a Supreme Personage or a Cosmic Dice Roll, we are people, and not machines; and machines can not become people. Genuine creativity can not be created mechanically. This ability to either create or sincerely admire true creativity is part of what makes us people instead of machines.

41942

41940 Friendly laughter can be fun… It’s also a great contraceptive if applied to the man when his exposes his “economy tooling...”

41937

41917

Hi, “Guest” and all. Just an observation from the peanut gallery here. They would be in Games\Misc Video Games/RPGs if there were any here, and very likely in the “Yaoi” or “Threesomes/Moresomes” subgroup. You will probably have to scan all the titles yourself, even once search is turned on again, in order to find any stories that are here. While the “informal tradition” is to put the name of the game in brackets or something in the description when the story doesn’t have a named sub-category, not everyone does this. You “need” at least five “legitimate” in-progress stories to add a “named” topic in most parts of the Archives. The site admins can give more accurate details. Since “Camp Buddy” is not a well-known “Visual Novel” type erotic game, you’ll probably have to write stories in order to find any good ones. IIRC, the “School Days” universe, which is the best known Japanese erotic “Visual Novel” game series with an Anime and a Manga later produced, only has four stories here as of now. While “Camp Buddy” is probably every bit as good for Yaoi as the “School Days” series is for Het with a pinch of Yaoi in the side, “no one” has heard of it. If it wasn’t for the “Nice Boat” memes that were inspired by the “School Days” anime, then no one would have heard of that erotic Visual Novel game, either. Good luck. PS: if you do write a “Camp Buddy” story, could you also try writing a “Camp Buddy/School Days” crossover? Just askin’. I’d try for it, but I have too many projects I’m stuck on or putting off as it is.

41901

The spelling checker and grammar checker in most higher-end word processing programs are “AI” in the barest and crudest sense of the phrase. They can help you produce better writing—and they can also foul things up exponentially. Even in translation, AI is at best an imperfect crutch, and can produce some real dumpster-fire-funny results. In athletic competition or exhibition, performance-enhancing drugs and robots are banned, because we don’t want to see “fakery.” Likewise in non-athletic competition, marked card decks, chess computers, and the like are also banned. In the creative arts it should be no different. AI is to me no more and no less than the “automated attendant” provided by companies trying to avoid providing good goods and serviceable services even after you’ve already paid for them.

Could you be a little bit more specific, please? “St. Elsewhere” has one hundred seventy one such stories. The count on the archives here may have fewer but more erotic ones. But that’s still a lot of stories! Good luck.

41881

The differences between AI/copypasta and what you’ve described are creativity and imagination. An AI program will only operate according to its own rules. Creative people, by their very nature, go beyond the rules, but in a way that still makes sense, if you will. An AI can plagiarize a collection of historians writing about the War of the Roses and mash it up with plagarized Tolkien. It took a real person to write the book series A Song of Ice and Fire.