Publishers fight very shy of AI, and I understand that, just as I understand why universities don't want students using AI; but I don't see a huge difference between students using AI to polish things and employing tutors to do the same thing, or writers getting feedback from writing workshops or employing mentors to read their work and comment. In some ways AI doing those things is democratising, as it's free or very cheap to access, and tutors/mentors/workshops cost money.
Where I do see a difference is in the creation of what is passed off as original writing, whether that is academic or fictional/poetic. That is where AI has limitations, as it is not a non-thinking robot. It is a computer that scrapes the internet for phrases and plots that is in its memory because humans have put them there, deliberately or accidentally. It will write poems 'in the style of X', come up with plot lines for stories based on others it 'knows', and write dissertations and essays which can get students degrees. If people take those things and pretend it is their own writing it is obtaining money by deception, and if enough people stop learning how to do it themselves, AI won't have enough original sources to work from - it will ultimately be the author of its own demise.
I need advice for a mutually messy situation
Who's Controlling The Straits of Hormuz?


