Krista

It is sad, she shouldn't have to settle, but she was forced to. It is also completely out of your control and as a parent as well, I know that feeling. To watch creative people defend the systematic dismantling of creativity is worrisome to me. It 'will' knock on our door someday. People writing it off as easy to 'pick out' AI slop will one day realize that eventually AI will close those 'gaps' and 'safeguards' between organic writing and what it is currently capable of doing. Although, if done slowly, passage by passage, someone with 'some' skill can already use AI and get around those 'creative' holes and gaps. And then there's always opinions and opinions change, to see all this early waffling isn't promising. Look at Animation Vs. CGI. We used to scoff at how clunky and unclean CGI was, it was horrendous when it first came out. Now it is rare to see traditional animation in anything, especially mainstream. Advancement makes things obsolete everyday, for better and worse. And, it takes all kinds in a community. I have no qualms about being controversial, blunt, or opinionated. The way I see it, if my mouth/words are too much and it overshadows my worth and writing, then it gives me a good reason to retire from all this.

Sometimes you just log-in, mind your business. Then read that you were mistakenly propositioned for an underwater blowie, that by all accounts, will be done with professionalism. And you laugh. And it is a solid notch of good on a decent day. Although being a heterosexual biological female, I must admit I never thought I'd see the day I'd be offered.

I doubt anyone has clutched their pearls reading my saucy writing. You best believe I've closed my laptop when the husband entered the room reading some of the stuff you've written though. I don't even want to attempt to explain myself if his eyeballs landed on that filth. He needs protected, he's a golden retriever.

Go ahead, if it makes you feel better. But I'd imagine that most readers here would think that would be a tragic end to what sounds like a good time. Not me, I'm a lady.

I mean... I barely get two or three sizeable paragraphs into that sort of writing and I'm like... "I can't, I have to end this mess..." so 10 pages, and not ever to see daylight. Sad.

This is spooky, or have I shown you the character sheet and forgot? Lol. I'm leaning on showing it to you as I've always valued your opinion on such things.

For me, it is a no. When you watch a Digital artist become completely obsolete, I cannot call it a technique. As it took that digital artist years to craft and hone their skill. They started out on simple mediums, grew their talent through failures, physically hundreds of hours. They shifted from paper/pencil sketching, to learning how to do it with digital brushes on a digital pad or screen. They learned color theory, they branched out, they were either self taught, or went to art school/programs. They were burdened by physical and mental limitations every step of the way. They had to sleep, eat, bathe, socialize, and feel the demands and pressure of living on this planet as a human being trying to create in a world that doesn't allow for many slow pastimes and hobbies. Most importantly though through that time you create your own stylistic choices in the process, tendencies that you carry with you throughout your creative life. Something that when you look at the work you 'know' that it is your work no matter the medium. AI does all of that on its own and it does it like a factory printing operation that mass produces art in minutes. With none of the physical and mental demands. The only technique you learn is how to optimize it and use other tools to manipulate it 'just enough' to then allow you to settle on the idea that it wasn't 100% AI generated. AI at its core, is the ultimate mimicry. I am not completely anti-progress, even with AI. I do not see this as progress though, I see it as replacement via convenience. Optimization and mass production over skilled labor intensive work.

😮 why you chickening me?

I don't like the idea of any of it. Like I said in earlier posts, I do not like the idea of AI taking away from creative spaces. That is a blanket statement for me to make, as it replaces people. You can monetize fake music now, for streaming. Some platforms have restrictions, it has to be heavily human/organic manipulated before it could be considered for platform hosting and monetization on their platform. Others are more open to the idea of completely AI generated songs to be monetized and put on their platform. Or, you can do it yourself on your own website and people have to use their judgement if they wish to buy it or not. And there are numerous platforms out there. You can also get it licensed for use in film, videos/content creation, streaming, and video games/animation. So, it goes without saying that Digital art, production, and other creative spaces, even coding, can be replicated, mass produced via AI, and hindering organic slower creation in the process. What most people don't seem to realize is that restrictions with some platforms for us, aren't restrictive for everyone. There are plenty of AI's out there that are a lot less restrictive. What we've seen here is the tip. They're highly regulated. They're behind a paywall, if you wish to mass produce you have to do so via paying for those services, and since they are more public, their mass production capabilities are stifled. That doesn't hold true for more powerful AIs and their functionality and capabilities. Imagine a machine creating and cycling through hundreds of prompts, creating thousands of images. Nothing can compete with that and that's where we're heading. AI can even filter itself, say the prompt produces three to four hundred images of a certain prompt, you can then prompt it to eliminate based on certain prompt outcomes that got it slightly wrong. And it learns from that, just in case you wish to prompt similarly later, so that it gets it right more often. When it becomes more universally abundant then, like everything else it will become more difficult to determine what is organic and what is not. It has come a long way quickly. You can get around prompts that go haywire, even on the "free" janky services that used to give people seven fingers, or none at all. Produce prompts where everyone looked the same, despite prompting "group of friends," and so on. What I also fear is expectations. We see it all the time. We're fickle. Hollywood and main stream film has pretty much told us that we're only going to get Live Action remakes, sequels, and lackluster overtold stories in our films. We flock to them and make them billions, for almost scene for scene lifeless nonsense. Although the film industry at least in theatres are a waning industry, it is still dictating much of what's readily out there. What AI will do, is make it easier to disregard expectations, lower our standards, and overlook the creative processes that didn't happen in the making of what we're consuming. Especially when it systematically doesn't give us much of a choice. And they're going to be doing it with a lot less organic control, and they're going to get richer in the process. So no, I don't like it. It doesn't protect anyone, it could lead to easy exploitation. As for your question, specifically. No, I don't like it or feel comfortable with the idea. I was talking privately about it to someone the other evening. I do not want to get in-depth here, but it is a scary and hard pass for me, when it comes to that kind of content. Not because it creates unhealthy expectations, because there are a lot of things out there that gives unrealistic expectations and that industry 'always' has, to a point, done that. Same with Celebrity worship, photoshopping, filters, manipulations, and so on. This is just another cog in that machine, it's faster and can be more widespread, that's the difference. As a whole, I pass on that industry entirely, I have no use for it. I do see the issues where people become so entangled with AI that they become addicted. Since 'that' industry is also already addictive, then it is just another layer on that as well. The overall dependency AI is pressing home is what's scary to me.

Sigh... honestly, that is a lot of writing that I'm probably going to give up on. Titles and everything. I'll give it a once more read through to see if I can pump some life into the story.

And you know they've already looked up office hours and knew exactly when you opened.

And yes, I do try to sneak and read the filth and write it mind you, because I have a nosy husband and I really do not like hearing the words: "What in the world are you reading?" When he's glanced over my shoulder and seen exactly what I was reading... And we'll see which way Jason responds to this latest accusation, he mostly feigns innocence. I'm thinking 'feigns' is the correct term to use anyway.

Don't loop my filth writing in with his, it would be an insult to his craft. We are the pearl clutchers, he is the one making us clutch them. But yes, this topic is better than the original. For reasons, some obvious, some not.

I see the point. Overuse can make the sentences cumbersome. I found that I use, "just" a lot, when it isn't necessary. And, I sometimes over explain with tag-on afterthought sentences at the end of paragraphs. My paragraphs tend to be long as they are, making them longer with that tag-along statement. I see it now, but time will tell if I allow myself to change the way I operate. The example you provided though, I am too forgiving in the second example for it to matter. To me the Was/Were additions didn't steal from the intent. The first read like a soft exhale, but the second one read similarly. I can see where an editor would remove, but as far as my own personal regard for both examples, there's not much difference in preference for me. Like I said though, I am far more forgiving with the words on the paper, what I tend to not forgive are character choices that seemingly doesn't make sense to me. If I had to choose though, I'd pick the first sentence, as the style seems more stylistic than the second example.