Given how AI is already polluting the water of literary works, I’m likely never going to read a new book for quite some time, but will just pursue books before 2010.
Is 2010 a good cutoff?
How do you feel about books by Alexandre Dumas? They are from long before AI. But… Dumas had a collaborator called Maquet, who came up with plots and did a big part of the writing. He was an ok writer, but not as good as Dumas. So their collaboration was like this: Dumas paid Maquet to produce quantities of ok stories for him. Then Dumas edited them to add his brilliant language and ideas, and Dumas got to take all the credit and glory.
If an AI can produce a book that takes all of human creativity and blows my socks away in weaving a tapestry of storytelling, then that’s great. But I don’t see AI being used that way. I see AI being used to sell products. I see AI writing a book that sucks you in the first half, and then moralizes you about the dangers of socialism in the second half whilst promoting Wolf Cola
(Interesting about Dumas though, I had no idea. It doesn’t ruin the few books I’ve read of his for me)
If I may be a centrist about this.
OP is being silly wanting a year-cutoff. Geeenerally people who are whole-hog on AI are very proud of that and will yell about it to the four winds. And even if they didn’t, reputation is a real thing one can rely on for knowing who are the goodies and the baddies. (… though if they do feel that’s the only way… 2023. That’s the date. November 2023 is when ChatGPT became something the public could use, and the floodgates opened for businesspeople wanting to replace all artists with robots. Before that, Generative AI was used mostly either by scientists for research into AI itself… Or by internet dorks like me for shitposting. It wasn’t good enough for anything else either way.)
With that said, y’all are being unreasonable to them too: Literature is art, and when it comes to art, “I don’t like the way it feels” is more than enough reason to not want to engage with something. If OP says “I don’t want to touch anything AI related, I don’t care if it is quote-unquote good” then that should be a complete sentence, and require no belaboured justification whatsoever.
That’s pretty ridiculous. The overwhelming majority of writers won’t use AI at all. Are you going to somehow avoid all modern media?
There have always been bad books. There will always be good books. An arbitrary cutoff would only hurt myself.
I feel that bad books written by humans is different than books written by AI, and I feel the difference is mostly intent. A bad book might have been written with the best of intentions. A generated book, not so much
If you find value in the book, it doesn’t matter who wrote it. Now… author reputation is a good metric, if a AI is consistently pumping out good books… then its time to welcome the robot overlords.
Asking other people you trust for recommendations is a great starting point.
I tend to stick to the same authors, so I trust them. I doubt Michael Connelly, or John Grisham will use AI and even if they do the book will still end up being good because they will use it as an inspiration rather than copy paste it into a book.
No cut off. AI may have some books out there but not all. There will always be authors out there like Martha Wells, Sanderson, john Scalzi and even new debut authors all the time trying to write. Agree with other poster, you’re only going to miss out by limiting yourself
What’s your cutoff year for reading books?
No one else has a cutoff year. People have a cutoff quality and if an AI slop book doesn’t pass the quality gate, they’ll stop reading it.
WTF are you talking about.
tuoba gniklat uoy era ftw
