If you *want* to use it as part of drafting/iteration to determine which approach reads best, instead of writing a dozen+ drafts to get there, I don’t see a problem. But having “AI” do your work for you with minimal individual contribution… Why is your employer paying you?
LevTheDevil on
No. Absolutely not. AI is damaging to the planet and will make you think you’re a better writer than you are. They’re designed first and foremost to please the user so they’ll say whatever to make you keep coming back.
You’ll get more honesty from a stripper.
Synaps4 on
AI is just stealing fanfiction with a couple extra steps and less risk of getting sued.
You’re not a screenwriter if you use AI. You’re not writing. You’re a screen-editor at best.
printerdsw1968 on
Last time the screen writers went on strike, one of the main reasons was precisely to keep AI from replacing the writers room. Don’t be undermining your own profession.
peripheralpill on
you can do whatever you want as long as you disclose it, so i know where not to spend my money
Bodidiva on
I personally wouldn’t but whatever a person chooses to do with their writing is up to them. No way to say that I’ll like or dislike it any more or less than stuff people write.
merurunrun on
As far as I understand it, Hollywood covers its ass *like crazy* when it comes to scriptwriters being “inspired” by already extant works; even if you don’t want to get into the ethics of generative AI itself, the headache it would create for studios to either buy off or systematically scrub the elements from someone else’s work when the scriptwriter can’t even tell them who they were stealing from seems like a big no-go.
dethb0y on
Considering how bad most movie scripts are these days it could probably only be an improvement.
nosleepforthedreamer on
Of course not.
If an employer’s productivity expectations are so high that generating work via AI is necessary to maintain a reasonable workload, which I absolutely believe will happen and probably already does, then all artists should rally for employees’ welfare and artistic integrity.
Rethious on
> When screenwriters I know talk about generative A.I., they’re not dismissive, though they’re clear about its limits. One writer says he brainstorms with a chatbot when he’s “breaking story,” sketching major plot points and turns. The bot doesn’t solve the problem, but in effect, it prompts him to go past the obvious. Another, an illustrious writer-director, used it to turn a finished screenplay into the “treatment” the studio wanted first, saving himself days of busywork. A third, hired to write a period feature, has found it helpful in coming up with cadences that felt true to a certain historical figure. These writers loathe cliché. But for those charged with creating “lean back” entertainment — second-screen viewing — the aim isn’t achieving originality so much as landing beats cleanly for a mass audience.
Quoting this since there’s a paywall.
The first cases seem like fine uses when you think about what “AI” is: a pattern predicting machine based on language. Seeing what math predicts would be next in language can be useful for provoking thought. Obviously, it’s not going to be as good as expertise in recreating period dialogue, but it’s likely better than just the average writer eyeballing it. This is AI used for generating things other than the actual writing that goes in the end product.
The second case is more controversial in that it’s directly using AI writing. I think it’s something of a betrayal to the consumer who believes this is fully the author’s intent. On the other hand, if the consumer is seeking out something so formulaic and tropey that AI writing is completely indistinguishable, it seems like the sausage principle might apply. What’s the difference between mediocre dialogue written with AI and mediocre dialogue written by a ghostwriter paid pennies? Where’s the value in artisan slop?
faceintheblue on
“I managed to get platformed by the New York Times. Is it okay if I use this vantage point to put a stick into the eye of every writer who wishes they were in my shoes while also insulting the public who will consume the work I plan to produce using AI instead of, you know, creating my own work?”
I guess that’s too long for a headline…
Polymath99_ on
>*researching with ChatGPT makes Googling feel like driving to the library.*
Sure, ok, as long as you doublecheck the sources it can be a good research tool, I can see it for that.
>*Then I began feeding ChatGPT my scripts and asking for feedback.*
I mean, I can’t imagine its notes being useful beyond standard, boilerplate stuff… but I guess if your writing adheres pretty rigidly to set formulas, it could help. Do consult with fellow human writers in your life, though.
>*Recently I went one step further: I asked it to write a couple of scenes. (…) With a few tweaks, I could drop them straight into a screenplay.*
… Yeah no, fuck that noise. Don’t be lazy, do the work and don’t plagiarize shit, simple as.
rowrowfightthepandas on
> Much of my work is historical or fact-based, and I have found that researching with ChatGPT makes Googling feel like driving to the library, combing the card catalog, ordering books and waiting weeks for them to arrive.
15 Comments
no it’s not alright.
No it’s not!
Just my two cents on this matter…
If you *want* to use it as part of drafting/iteration to determine which approach reads best, instead of writing a dozen+ drafts to get there, I don’t see a problem. But having “AI” do your work for you with minimal individual contribution… Why is your employer paying you?
No. Absolutely not. AI is damaging to the planet and will make you think you’re a better writer than you are. They’re designed first and foremost to please the user so they’ll say whatever to make you keep coming back.
You’ll get more honesty from a stripper.
AI is just stealing fanfiction with a couple extra steps and less risk of getting sued.
You’re not a screenwriter if you use AI. You’re not writing. You’re a screen-editor at best.
Last time the screen writers went on strike, one of the main reasons was precisely to keep AI from replacing the writers room. Don’t be undermining your own profession.
you can do whatever you want as long as you disclose it, so i know where not to spend my money
I personally wouldn’t but whatever a person chooses to do with their writing is up to them. No way to say that I’ll like or dislike it any more or less than stuff people write.
As far as I understand it, Hollywood covers its ass *like crazy* when it comes to scriptwriters being “inspired” by already extant works; even if you don’t want to get into the ethics of generative AI itself, the headache it would create for studios to either buy off or systematically scrub the elements from someone else’s work when the scriptwriter can’t even tell them who they were stealing from seems like a big no-go.
Considering how bad most movie scripts are these days it could probably only be an improvement.
Of course not.
If an employer’s productivity expectations are so high that generating work via AI is necessary to maintain a reasonable workload, which I absolutely believe will happen and probably already does, then all artists should rally for employees’ welfare and artistic integrity.
> When screenwriters I know talk about generative A.I., they’re not dismissive, though they’re clear about its limits. One writer says he brainstorms with a chatbot when he’s “breaking story,” sketching major plot points and turns. The bot doesn’t solve the problem, but in effect, it prompts him to go past the obvious. Another, an illustrious writer-director, used it to turn a finished screenplay into the “treatment” the studio wanted first, saving himself days of busywork. A third, hired to write a period feature, has found it helpful in coming up with cadences that felt true to a certain historical figure. These writers loathe cliché. But for those charged with creating “lean back” entertainment — second-screen viewing — the aim isn’t achieving originality so much as landing beats cleanly for a mass audience.
Quoting this since there’s a paywall.
The first cases seem like fine uses when you think about what “AI” is: a pattern predicting machine based on language. Seeing what math predicts would be next in language can be useful for provoking thought. Obviously, it’s not going to be as good as expertise in recreating period dialogue, but it’s likely better than just the average writer eyeballing it. This is AI used for generating things other than the actual writing that goes in the end product.
The second case is more controversial in that it’s directly using AI writing. I think it’s something of a betrayal to the consumer who believes this is fully the author’s intent. On the other hand, if the consumer is seeking out something so formulaic and tropey that AI writing is completely indistinguishable, it seems like the sausage principle might apply. What’s the difference between mediocre dialogue written with AI and mediocre dialogue written by a ghostwriter paid pennies? Where’s the value in artisan slop?
“I managed to get platformed by the New York Times. Is it okay if I use this vantage point to put a stick into the eye of every writer who wishes they were in my shoes while also insulting the public who will consume the work I plan to produce using AI instead of, you know, creating my own work?”
I guess that’s too long for a headline…
>*researching with ChatGPT makes Googling feel like driving to the library.*
Sure, ok, as long as you doublecheck the sources it can be a good research tool, I can see it for that.
>*Then I began feeding ChatGPT my scripts and asking for feedback.*
I mean, I can’t imagine its notes being useful beyond standard, boilerplate stuff… but I guess if your writing adheres pretty rigidly to set formulas, it could help. Do consult with fellow human writers in your life, though.
>*Recently I went one step further: I asked it to write a couple of scenes. (…) With a few tweaks, I could drop them straight into a screenplay.*
… Yeah no, fuck that noise. Don’t be lazy, do the work and don’t plagiarize shit, simple as.
> Much of my work is historical or fact-based, and I have found that researching with ChatGPT makes Googling feel like driving to the library, combing the card catalog, ordering books and waiting weeks for them to arrive.
We’re so fucking cooked