Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.written
Subject: Re: Can CHATGPT or Google Gemini write Sci-fi
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2024 11:36:30 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <vdrmdu$q2le$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vdpve8$27f4$7@gallifrey.nk.ca> <lmblmkF88r2U1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2024 17:36:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="65d1092e53f2531e15e85ceee769fa8c";
	logging-data="854702"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/50HNJtLYGjJb7jo+8GbHUdFDWzvD0Jq8="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:lzeu8eoQhukMdO8fHUoMW94EwDM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <lmblmkF88r2U1@mid.individual.net>
Bytes: 2298

On 10/4/2024 10:13 PM, Chris Buckley wrote:
> On 2024-10-04, The Doctor <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>> A question for discussion.
> 
> It's bee happening for a couple of years already. Why should it stop
 > now that the AI is better?>
> NY Times 2/23/2023
>    And now, it seems, it's happening in real life. The editors of three
>    science fiction magazines — Clarkesworld, The Magazine of Fantasy &
>    Science Fiction, and Asimov's Science Fiction — said this week that
>    they had been flooded by submissions of works of fiction generated
>    by A.I. chatbots.

According to Neil Clarke's (the editor of _Clarkesworld_) post on 
February 15, 2023 (https://neil-clarke.com/a-concerning-trend/):

 > I’m not going to detail how I know these stories are “AI” spam or
 > outline any of the data I have collected from these submissions.
 > There are some very obvious patterns [snip]

I guess we could rephrase the original question: "Can CHATGPT or Google 
Gemini write SF that is not obviously AI-generated? And if they can't do 
it now, what about 1-3-5-10 years from now?" As Clarke wrote in his post:

 > the technology is only going to get better, so detection will become 
more challenging