Comment by keiferski
2 hours ago
No comment on whether the book seems AI-generated or not, but:
It is quite insidious how AI is trained on real-world writers, who then get accused of being a copy, not the original.
It makes me think the future of language, at least in realms where authenticity matters, is going to be constantly changing slang, experimental structures, etc. – all things that boilerplate LLMs will never give you.
That's not what's happening here though, people didn't read her book (that's not out yet) and think it was written by AI because of the style, they think it's written by AI because of statements she made about using AI.
I’m aware; that’s why my first sentence said what it did.
I was making a more general comment about the way AI works and how writers are increasingly getting accused of having “AI-style” writing.
I’m glad you didn’t comment on the book no one has laid eyes upon, written in a language none of us speak!
Re:the rest, meh. People will continue to enjoy good literature — no need to performatively try to prove the unprovable. To say the least, AI is already perfectly capable of adapting new slang and of attempting “experimental structures”.
Sorry if rude. I’m glad you care about authenticity in art — on that we can all agree!