> She uses the AI for a job that should be hers, not the AI's.
Also what would she otherwise buy the AI for? Cooking recipes? I'm on the free plan and hardly hit any limits.
She didn't ask it "what profession could person X be in an Y novel". She asked it to develop (rozwinąć) a story.
It's not that hard to understand that developing a story is actually her job.
Small details (profession, name, colours) are ok (my opinion). Developing parts of the story is not.
You may wonder where the line is - many reputable Polish writers are in consensus - no AI.
AI should have no place in creative works.
You are free to think otherwise. However I don't think those writers are wrong, especially if they're talking on a subject that is their profession, I'm no writer.
Try to stop calling people you disagree with a "religion". It's within reason to believe that AI can have a technically useful place in the creative process and it's within reason to believe that AI should not be anywhere in the creative process as a principled opinion.
Also, the framing of "winning the cultural debate" is telling. Typically this refers to what will happen, not what should happen. I.e. it's basically just saying, "I think what will happen is what I want to happen", not an actual argument for why you want it. It's a red flag that you are arguing from a tribalistic position (or "religious", you could say).
Whoah, hold up: I am arguing with someone who does not believe it's within reason to think AI can have a technically useful place in the creative process. That's why I'm choosing the words I am.
> The prospects of making a living in the midlist are unbelievably bad, and getting worse.
Sure, but it's not an excuse for making the world a shittier place by publishing more AI content. It's very known that AIs have agreement bias and mostly agree with you.
44% of new music uploaded to Deezer is AI generated.
Also she said 4 years ago that "literature is not for idiots". I don't think calling people names is a good way of promoting your content. And now she's complaining that the amount of people reading her works is declining?
Furthermore, she accused academic teachers of narrow thinking (apparently calling people 'idiots' wasn't enough). Honestly, Andrzej Dragan works [1] are arguably more important, but who am I to judge?
