Booktok 📚 discussion
Miscellaneous
>
Why do people harass people for using AI in writing?
date
newest »
newest »
It’s literally not any different than plagiarism. AI uses published works for a database and does it without consent. The authors don’t even get paid when AI uses their work.
yyagmurrtk wrote: "It’s literally not any different than plagiarism. AI uses published works for a database and does it without consent. The authors don’t even get paid when AI uses their work."I understand the concern, but plagiarism is copying word-for-word without credit. AI doesn’t do that, it generates new material. The author still has to shape, edit, and build the story. At the end of the day, the responsibility for originality rests with the writer, not the tool. I agree with it using authors’ work to train the model is unethical though. I don't think it is going away it's here to stay. It needs heavy regulations and laws to protect people from their work being used and to protect the environment from data center pollutions!
Also I think for me that writing is a form of art. And a thing that can’t even feel emotions or even comprehend them should never be included in art.
It could also be because some people may copy word for word whatever AI gives them, instead of using for a draft, to get ideas, to get their thoughts organized, or into something they can build off of and make it their own.
people say AI creates something new, but that's not the case. it literally takes bits and pieces of real people's creative works and pieces it together into something "new". it copies quotes, writing styles, phrases, language, etc. there's nothing original or creative about using AI to write for you imoplus there are people who put in years of work to achieve the style they have currently or create a piece, and AI can replicate it within seconds. in my opinion, that's not art. the author essentially didn't do anything
anyways sorry for the rant, this is a topic i feel very passionately about lol
not only is generative AI legitimately plagiarism, but it is highly unethical and devastating to the environment. also, it prevents people from being creative and using their own brain. there’s nothing good about it. it is absolutely valid for people to call out that harmful behavior, as AI doesn’t belong in any creative or artistic spaces. :)
I think some people think of it as plagarism. I have no preference on using AI. I prefer to write the stuff myself so I know it's my work and my words. But...other people have different opinions.
So what about using AI to fix formatting issues and add dialogue tags? Do you see a problem with that?
I got locked out of my fanfic account and had to voice type the whole thing so i told AI to add dialogue tags and fix the formatting. Is there anything wrong with this?
Nox™ wrote: "Im curious Im seeing alot of people online get mad at people using AI as tools to write but will use apps that heavily use AI like tiktok and Google etc. Im confused at the selective outrage. Why d..." I've used AI to research how to use words and if the sentences are grammatically correct. In my book, I haven't used AI to write it for me.
yyagmurrtk wrote: "Also I think for me that writing is a form of art. And a thing that can’t even feel emotions or even comprehend them should never be included in art."OKAY!!! This is awesome response! This makes sense to me! Yes if it is a form of art and human feeling then i can see why people push back at it. I honestly didn't think of it that way but you made sense. I think you are the first person to say this and it gives me much to think about, thank you for this!!
Forever_Hopes_Eyes wrote: "I got locked out of my fanfic account and had to voice type the whole thing so i told AI to add dialogue tags and fix the formatting. Is there anything wrong with this?"I'm not sure. I would say I personally do not care how people write their stories as long as its not plagiarism then I do not care personally. But Im reading on the internet about it and so far it says specifically that CHAT GPT models do not plagiarize they use models to learn language and how sentences are structured then make new texts based on algorithms and math. So that to me doesnt seem like plagiarism =/ But i am still learning about the process.
Kaitlynn wrote: "It could also be because some people may copy word for word whatever AI gives them, instead of using for a draft, to get ideas, to get their thoughts organized, or into something they can build off..."Oh is that bad if they are prompting the story themselves though? Hmm. This is a very nuanced conversation and I am not sure where to go or what to think I just want the environment to be safe and creators to nont get their stuff stolen T_T
Taylor wrote: "Nox™ wrote: "Im curious Im seeing alot of people online get mad at people using AI as tools to write but will use apps that heavily use AI like tiktok and Google etc. Im confused at the selective o..."And do people get mad at you for that and say you are using AI so you are evil? =3
Aurora Jade wrote: "I think some people think of it as plagarism. I have no preference on using AI. I prefer to write the stuff myself so I know it's my work and my words. But...other people have different opinions."This right here! I have seen this argument too and I was hoping to find some articles or something to show that it plagiarizes but articles say that it does not it creates new texts based on the data its trained on so idk. Im trying to get factual information on this. Thank you for sharing!
soph ₊˚ෆ (joey's version) 🍉 wrote: "people say AI creates something new, but that's not the case. it literally takes bits and pieces of real people's creative works and pieces it together into something "new". it copies quotes, writi..."No worries I want to hear your opinions!
Im hearing people argue this case but then people argue that it doesnt do that IM SO CONFUSED lol. I think I just need to do more research on the matter because theres so much information out there arguing that is but its not.....sigh.....but it most definitely harms our environment, so thats a huge minus. Also people are using it to spread misinformation and racist videos T_T
I wasn't aware off that. Good to know. Thanks!
yyagmurrtk wrote: "It’s literally not any different than plagiarism. AI uses published works for a database and does it without consent. The authors don’t even get paid when AI uses their work."THIS Agreed.
Because the last thing we need is more safety and sterility in this world. AI should be used as a grammar check and that's it. If you need AI to help you create your own written word you are either:a. not creative
b. selling yourself short/giving up too soon
c. confused about your life path.
Start fighting, start drinking, and write your own shit.
Nox™ wrote: "Aurora Jade wrote: "I think some people think of it as plagarism. I have no preference on using AI. I prefer to write the stuff myself so I know it's my work and my words. But...other people have d..."No problem! Glad to share! I just think that whatever AI helps you with, it is already out in the world so it could be stealing someone elses ideas for stuff. Like helping to edit stuff with like, Word document, so you're writing it yourself and you can see issues in your writing, but having AI do the whole thing for you...
Magdalene wrote: "Because the last thing we need is more safety and sterility in this world. AI should be used as a grammar check and that's it. If you need AI to help you create your own written word you are either..."Thank you! AI should be used to fix spelling errors and gramatical errors only!
Forever_Hopes_Eyes wrote: "So what about using AI to fix formatting issues and add dialogue tags? Do you see a problem with that?"I think using AI to do that is mostly okay and for like spelling errors and gramar errors only.
Besides the already good points made against using AI as a writer, I want to add that as of now most of the time it's noticeable it's AI writing because it's more clinical, it lacks that ingredient X that only a human with a soul can give to a narrative. I can't imagine AI able to make me cry.That being said, you can make it work for you, like a copy editor, checking your texts for cliches, tone, grammar, etc. and also for research.
uhh no.. definitely don’t use ai for research?..?just a little reminder that no matter how “small” or “simple” a task you use generative ai for, it STILL negatively impacts the environment and it is STILL wrong. just because it helps you with something minor doesn’t make it any better, sorry. it doesn’t matter what it’s used for, using it at all is objectively bad.
there are plenty of articles on the catastrophic damage ai is currently inflicting on the environment, all of the water it drains in order to cool down these systems (which btw are in mega facilities which in itself is largely devastating to the environment) and the damage it is doing to humans as well if you want to check them out. i highly suggest staying educated on this topic, it’s very serious.
You’re making sweeping claims without much nuance. Of course AI has an environmental footprint—but so does every other digital tool we use daily, from Google searches to Netflix streaming. If your standard is “never use anything that consumes energy in a server farm,” then you’d need to log off the internet entirely.Also, you misread what I said. I wasn’t talking about replacing actual research with AI. Obviously it can’t be trusted as a primary source. I said it can help with tasks like summarizing, organizing, or checking text—functions that are no more environmentally devastating than the hundreds of other background processes we all rely on every day.
Blanket declarations like “using it at all is objectively bad” don’t make you sound informed—they make you sound absolutist. The conversation is more complex than that, and reducing it to moral grandstanding doesn’t really educate anyone.
If you think “never touch AI ever” is some enlightened stance, you might want to check how much water and energy goes into literally every Google search, TikTok scroll, or Netflix binge. Again, by your logic, you should be off the internet entirely.
I never said to replace research with AI—just that it can streamline small tasks, same way Grammarly or spellcheck does. Declaring “it’s objectively bad no matter what” isn’t insightful, it’s absolutist. Tech isn’t going away, and pretending otherwise isn’t a serious argument.
Lilly wrote: "You’re making sweeping claims without much nuance. Of course AI has an environmental footprint—but so does every other digital tool we use daily, from Google searches to Netflix streaming. If your ..."i don't think anyone said that lmao, we're just talking about how harmful it is to writers. yes it's detrimental to the environment, but there's nothing creative or original about it at all. also, AI doesn't source anything. it just grabs from the first result whether it's correct or not so it's not at all reliable for research.
Nobody here is confused about AI’s flaws—it’s derivative, it’s not original, and it’s not a source of truth. That was literally my point.I never said to outsource research to AI or treat it as a “source.” I said it can assist with research tasks—organizing info, checking tone, pointing out clichés.
And honestly, calling it inherently unreliable is a bit naïve—AI is already baked into tools you probably use every day (Grammarly, Google Sheets, even PDF software) and it's only spreading even more. It’s part of the digital ecosystem already.
Lilly wrote: "You’re making sweeping claims without much nuance. Of course AI has an environmental footprint—but so does every other digital tool we use daily, from Google searches to Netflix streaming. If your ..."i am specifically talking about generative ai, and i don’t think you’re getting what i’m saying lol
soph ₊˚ෆ (joey's version) 🍉 wrote: "Lilly wrote: "You’re making sweeping claims without much nuance. Of course AI has an environmental footprint—but so does every other digital tool we use daily, from Google searches to Netflix strea..."yes this is what i was trying to say lol
Chasie 🦋 wrote: i am specifically talking about generative ai, and i don’t think you’re getting what i’m saying lolYou were the one who wrote a whole paragraph about environmental damage from generative AI. Pointing out that all digital tools (Netflix, Google, streaming, etc.) have environmental costs isn’t “missing the point,” it’s literally engaging with your argument. The fact that you ignored my point about AI lack of originality just shows zero comprehension skills, which might explain the black-and-white way you read your “articles” about AI.
Chasie 🦋 wrote: "soph ₊˚ෆ (joey's version) 🍉 wrote: yes this is what i was trying to say lol,?
If repeating yourself in lowercase giggles with the "lol" and "lmao" is your response when your argument is weak... this is really like arguing with people convinced the Earth is flat hahaha so bye I'm done here
perhaps i don’t feel like arguing with someone who clearly already has their mind made about something (and i have better things to do than argue anyways..?) once you started insulting me i checked out. lol. have a great day lily <3
I personally think that the answer to this question differs person to person, and as an author myself, I will be dropping my two cents in this discussion. When we talk about 'using AI to write,' we are talking about putting our own creativity aside and letting AI do the rest. Sure, in today's world, everything depends heavily on AI, but the thing we need to see is that writing—along with other creative spaces— does not need AI. A person with enough passion and enough knowledge can sit and shape their stories just from their own imagination. Words can be carved out of experience and readings, and google can be used for research.
But the problem here is not whether google needs to be used or Tiktok needs to be used, the problem in general is generative AI. It is a problem for those who use it and for those who do not use it. Authors who are using generative AI in writing are defending their works, and authors who are not using it are being accused. So everyone is suffering one way or the other. It took me 2 years to write my first novel, and 8 months to write my second. Practice makes things perfect.
So my advice will always be to never go towards using AI in writing. Anyone can put a prompt in chatgpt and generate stories, but it is the human mind—an object so fascinating—that has been creating stories and worlds beyond what we can fathom. Nothing comes easy, everything takes time and effort, and if you feel like that is something you cannot give, then it is better to not touch the path of being an author.
And before anyone comes at me, I am saying this with experience in being an author before generative AI was even a thing. My journey started as a young Wattpad fanfic author, which then led me to be a self-published author now.
guys that agreement was wild i loved it
Here's the thing, AI is interesting but not original; the mind of man needs to be explored not the mind of machine. The machine may make a great companion but origination by the human is second to none. We are creatives by our very nature. We need to treasure that.
*RUDE COMMENTS WILL BE REPORTED, I am just trying to understand the thought process and the basis of people's fears and hatred behind this conversation I am not for nor against AI.*