Using AI.

[SkyBubble]

Lit does not allow AI written or AI assisted works. Some probably slip through, but their attempt to weed them out is aggressive enough that a lot of people complain about getting falsely accused.

Because that happens. It's happened to me twice.

 

[AwkwardMD]

Because that happens. It's happened to me twice.

Everyone knows. You've been a member of this site for nearly 20 years, and your entire post history has occured in the last 3 months complaining about this one thing.

Everyone knows. Go touch some grass.

 

[Light_Yagami]

Ever try using AI to write a story?

From my experience, I used Grammarly to check grammatical errors, and after publishing it, Lit rejected my work, claiming it was an AI-generated story. In my opinion, if one requires AI to create a story, it diminishes the essence of being an author. Story plots, ideas, and mishaps should be entirely original and personal, rather than something generated by an AI.

 

[Bob_Aganoush]

I did - I gave similar prompts to Grok and ChatGPT. My reaction is that while the stories were fairly well-written, there was very little erotic about them. They were sort of like an R-rated movie instead of X-rated.

Happy to share the results here if people are curious, but I certainly don’t want to post them as stories

 

[SkyBubble]

AI can be useful in catching grammar and spelling errors and typos. Sites like thesaurus.com can be useful to help find a synonym for a word you're overusing. That's about the limit of how I would use AI.

 

[Nynah]

John Oliver did a segment on AI slop on Last Week Tonight. He highlights a lot of what's wrong with it and why we should be more mindful about continuing to enshittify the Internet with it. I wish he spent more time on how much it's harming actual artists whose work is stolen by AI and how wasteful it is on resources, but I think it's still extremely worth watching.

 

[dirk2024]

AI can be useful in catching grammar and spelling errors and typos. Sites like thesaurus.com can be useful to help find a synonym for a word you're overusing. That's about heh limit of how I would use AI.

I love Thesaurus!

 

[Lifestyle66]

I won't use Ai to write a story.

But I'll use it to review my story to tell me WHY it's shit.

The problem I've noticed with asking for beta-readers is they are "one and done". When they give me a critique, it's biased based on their own preferences. And even if I revise the story to attend to their objections, the same reviewer can't re-read the revision with the same objectivity. They'll already have their preconceived impression that it's shit because of their first reading.

If I ask the AI "Can you provide a general critique of my erotic story?" then feed it the story, it returns immediately with a machine algorithm analysis of the issues with story structure, character development, and story arc. And regardless of how many revisions I give it, it returns a fresh critique of the details I changed.

But I don't follow up with asking it to recommend revisions.

 

[yano2mch]

Lit does not allow AI written or AI assisted works.

Hmmm this does hinder what i had in mind to do then, unless the rules have changed or interpreted differently; To which i'd like to get a clarification/ruling before considering proceeding.


To start: I noticed long ago i have a big limitation in writing which is a major problem for me; I can write large complex portions (think the largest opener post i ever did was 22k), but i can't get past certain hurdles unless i get feedback, it's like having perpetual writer's block that i just can't get over. I need some type of interaction in order to proceed after certain points. To which my goto RP/ERP (on f-list primarily) has been quite fruitful and made me a much better writer in the last 15 years. Nevermind i haven't actually published anything of note, but I'm am seriously considering it. Regardless, without feedback i get stuck on chapter 1 or 2... and just can't proceed. If i walk away and come back (weeks or months later?) and reread it all, maybe i can do another chapter or two. But it will never get completed. And the concepts for the original idea would have long since died out or been forgotten.

So onto AI; In the last few months I've been tinkering with AI models that specialize in writing and RPing. And RP they can, some are very very happy and even eager to jump into NSFW content. I've been finding 70B+ models to write well enough i can't tell if it's written by an LLM (other than really obvious mistakes usually to do with anatomy, or some relationship in size) and can handle complex concepts. Though sometimes you need to remind them of really obvious stuff (ex: Lamia don't have feet. The character is sitting in my lap facing away so they can't straddle/hug me back like that). etc.

One nice thing to consider is that i don't need to ask permission from my partner as an AI if i could share/publish said work, vs only owning half of it. As well as i don't have to wait for them to be awake and in the mood to reply every 10-15 minutes for the 4 hours they are available.


So with that preamble out of the way; I assume this too would not be allowed then?

 

[Bamagan]

Hmmm this does hinder what i had in mind to do then, unless the rules have changed or interpreted differently; To which i'd like to get a clarification/ruling before considering proceeding.


To start: I noticed long ago i have a big limitation in writing which is a major problem for me; I can write large complex portions (think the largest opener post i ever did was 22k), but i can't get past certain hurdles unless i get feedback, it's like having perpetual writer's block that i just can't get over. I need some type of interaction in order to proceed after certain points. To which my goto RP/ERP (on f-list primarily) has been quite fruitful and made me a much better writer in the last 15 years. Nevermind i haven't actually published anything of note, but I'm am seriously considering it. Regardless, without feedback i get stuck on chapter 1 or 2... and just can't proceed. If i walk away and come back (weeks or months later?) and reread it all, maybe i can do another chapter or two. But it will never get completed. And the concepts for the original idea would have long since died out or been forgotten.

So onto AI; In the last few months I've been tinkering with AI models that specialize in writing and RPing. And RP they can, some are very very happy and even eager to jump into NSFW content. I've been finding 70B+ models to write well enough i can't tell if it's written by an LLM (other than really obvious mistakes usually to do with anatomy, or some relationship in size) and can handle complex concepts. Though sometimes you need to remind them of really obvious stuff (ex: Lamia don't have feet. The character is sitting in my lap facing away so they can't straddle/hug me back like that). etc.

One nice thing to consider is that i don't need to ask permission from my partner as an AI if i could share/publish said work, vs only owning half of it. As well as i don't have to wait for them to be awake and in the mood to reply every 10-15 minutes for the 4 hours they are available.


So with that preamble out of the way; I assume this too would not be allowed then?

If you are basically copying and pasting something an AI generated into your story, that would be not be allowed. As you pointed out, you only created half of it (give or take), so presenting it as entirely your own work is dishonest, and Lit generally only allows you to publish something that is entirely your own for copyright purposes (well, minus an occasional attributed direct quote, I guess). Fanfiction is a potential exception and is somewhat problematic, but the rationales for allowing it don't overlap much with AI content.

In theory, it might be allowable to base a story off of your roleplaying or whatever with your chatbot, as a dramatization of a real-life event the same way people write about good sex they had. If you're lifting portions of the text you submit directly from the transcripts that's still a problem and might well trigger a rejection, but you could conceivably rewrite the entire exchange in your own words and be at least within the letter of the rules... insofar as I understand them, and with the caveat that I am in no way involved with determining what passes and what doesn't around here.

 

[yano2mch]

If you are basically copying and pasting something an AI generated into your story, that would be not be allowed. As you pointed out, you only created half of it (give or take), so presenting it as entirely your own work is dishonest, and Lit generally only allows you to publish something that is entirely your own for copyright purposes (well, minus an occasional attributed direct quote, I guess). Fanfiction is a potential exception and is somewhat problematic, but the rationales for allowing it don't overlap much with AI content.

I'd say at least 60% would be my own writing, i write long detailed replies. We're talking 2-3 paragraphs, sometimes considerably longer.

Current law says output from an AI (image generation, text, etc) isn't copyrightable (and lawsuits are usually to go after training data, though with Disney suing Midjourney. Gotta watch that one...); Yes i agree it would be dishonest if the work wasn't mine (or at least approved and gone over with a fine tooth comb). But then you look at works-for-hire and companies/people claim ownership over things they never touched at all, but instead have ownership over since copyright is too damn long. So is the question of intellectual dishonesty, or just the black&white ruling of the written rule regarding inclusion of AI vs human writing.

In theory, it might be allowable to base a story off of your roleplaying or whatever with your chatbot, as a dramatization of a real-life event the same way people write about good sex they had. If you're lifting portions of the text you submit directly from the transcripts that's still a problem and might well trigger a rejection, but you could conceivably rewrite the entire exchange in your own words and be at least within the letter of the rules... insofar as I understand them, and with the caveat that I am in no way involved with determining what passes and what doesn't around here.

Perhaps. Rewriting text that is perfectly serviceable content doesn't make sense to me though, very likely it would be nearly identical or slightly higher/lower quality and feel very draining like busy-work being told to write on the chalk board 'I will not use AI to write my homework' 50 times...

Having an AI proofread and fix misspellings, or rewriting something to include language or details you didn't originally anticipate i wouldn't consider a misuse either. But ethical stuff aside...

I understand wanting everything from a human, as it has soul to it that artificial writing doesn't. But I've also seen replies and writings that are so short and terse and uninteresting that it's boring.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Current law says output from an AI (image generation, text, etc) isn't copyrightable ...

That alone may be reason enough for it to be prohibited here.

 

[Britva415]

This isn't about law and copyright at all.

It's about the site's policy. There is zero tolerance for AI-generated text.

Having an AI proofread and fix misspellings, or rewriting something to include language or details you didn't originally anticipate i wouldn't consider a misuse either. But ethical stuff aside...

Proofreading and misspelling fixes aren't against policy. This is a task one doesn't need AI for, even if it's still computer-automated.

AI rewriting your text is explicitly mentioned in the FAQ on generative AI as something not to submit to Literotica.

 

[Bamagan]

I'd say at least 60% would be my own writing, i write long detailed replies. We're talking 2-3 paragraphs, sometimes considerably longer.

Current law says output from an AI (image generation, text, etc) isn't copyrightable (and lawsuits are usually to go after training data, though with Disney suing Midjourney. Gotta watch that one...); Yes i agree it would be dishonest if the work wasn't mine (or at least approved and gone over with a fine tooth comb). But then you look at works-for-hire and companies/people claim ownership over things they never touched at all, but instead have ownership over since copyright is too damn long. So is the question of intellectual dishonesty, or just the black&white ruling of the written rule regarding inclusion of AI vs human writing.



Perhaps. Rewriting text that is perfectly serviceable content doesn't make sense to me though, very likely it would be nearly identical or slightly higher/lower quality and feel very draining like busy-work being told to write on the chalk board 'I will not use AI to write my homework' 50 times...

Having an AI proofread and fix misspellings, or rewriting something to include language or details you didn't originally anticipate i wouldn't consider a misuse either. But ethical stuff aside...

I understand wanting everything from a human, as it has soul to it that artificial writing doesn't. But I've also seen replies and writings that are so short and terse and uninteresting that it's boring.

I'll try to keep this brief.
60% isn't very much more than half, so the distinction seems trivial. Even 70% or 80% wouldn't be very compelling.
Writers producing content whose copyright is signed over to someone else or a company is not a very relevant comparison to the issue of AI generated content. There is rarely any question that the former content is entitled to legal ownership and control, so it's simply a transaction of the rights.
The legal issues are presumably part of the site's rationale for rejecting such content, as it would be a burden on them to have to weed out perhaps thousands of such stories in the event that the law eventually says they're violations. But the pertinent detail for someone submitting to the site is that they do not wish to host AI content, regardless of what the law someday decides.
Rewriting serviceable text to make it better is what writers do. Or it's what they pay an editor for.
Having an AI rewrite something for you may not seem like a misuse to you, but it does to others, and the site owners apparently consider it to be such. As such, their interpretation is the one that carries the day on their site.

 

[Britva415]

I called it a "policy" while the FAQ says "there is no official policy."

This is the difference between de facto versus de jure. It cannot be said that there isn't a policy when there is clearly a practice and in fact an automated process of checking for generative AI in story submissions and rejecting them if it is suspected.

There is a policy, and there is even a whole page discussing it.

It just isn't """oFfIcIaL,""" I guess.

That does not mean anyone should expect there to be exceptions made, in practice.

https://www.literotica.com/faq/publishing/publishing-ai

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Hmmm this does hinder what i had in mind to do then, unless the rules have changed or interpreted differently; To which i'd like to get a clarification/ruling before considering proceeding.


To start: I noticed long ago i have a big limitation in writing which is a major problem for me; I can write large complex portions (think the largest opener post i ever did was 22k), but i can't get past certain hurdles unless i get feedback, it's like having perpetual writer's block that i just can't get over. I need some type of interaction in order to proceed after certain points. To which my goto RP/ERP (on f-list primarily) has been quite fruitful and made me a much better writer in the last 15 years. Nevermind i haven't actually published anything of note, but I'm am seriously considering it. Regardless, without feedback i get stuck on chapter 1 or 2... and just can't proceed. If i walk away and come back (weeks or months later?) and reread it all, maybe i can do another chapter or two. But it will never get completed. And the concepts for the original idea would have long since died out or been forgotten.

So onto AI; In the last few months I've been tinkering with AI models that specialize in writing and RPing. And RP they can, some are very very happy and even eager to jump into NSFW content. I've been finding 70B+ models to write well enough i can't tell if it's written by an LLM (other than really obvious mistakes usually to do with anatomy, or some relationship in size) and can handle complex concepts. Though sometimes you need to remind them of really obvious stuff (ex: Lamia don't have feet. The character is sitting in my lap facing away so they can't straddle/hug me back like that). etc.

One nice thing to consider is that i don't need to ask permission from my partner as an AI if i could share/publish said work, vs only owning half of it. As well as i don't have to wait for them to be awake and in the mood to reply every 10-15 minutes for the 4 hours they are available.


So with that preamble out of the way; I assume this too would not be allowed then?

It wouldn't be allowed on Lit, and thank god it is so. AO3 and possibly SOL allow AI-generated stories, so maybe you can indulge your ambitions and fantasies there. Or you can simply try to write stories without resorting to AI.

You know, there's nothing wrong with being just a reader. If you realize that you can't manage writing on your own, that's not the end of the world. I mean, I can't draw or paint for shit, but that doesn't stop me from fully enjoying other people's work.

 

[yano2mch]

That alone may be reason enough for it to be prohibited here.

Maybe. But a lot of stuff generated often get touch-ups, which is no longer wholly AI generated.

This isn't about law and copyright at all.

It's about the site's policy. There is zero tolerance for AI-generated text.


Proofreading and misspelling fixes aren't against policy. This is a task one doesn't need AI for, even if it's still computer-automated.

AI rewriting your text is explicitly mentioned in the FAQ on generative AI as something not to submit to Literotica.

Mhmm. A reason i wanted clarifications.

I'll try to keep this brief.
60% isn't very much more than half, so the distinction seems trivial. Even 70% or 80% wouldn't be very compelling.
Writers producing content whose copyright is signed over to someone else or a company is not a very relevant comparison to the issue of AI generated content. There is rarely any question that the former content is entitled to legal ownership and control, so it's simply a transaction of the rights.

Maybe?

Purely on a numbers level, you have to have the right model, with the right prompt, with the right context, with the right seed to reproduce the result.

But that isn't as important. I just see it odd that i see things from a roleplay perspective, and if i get permission from my partner and compile a roleplay into a story then it would be fine. But the only reason you'd know it might be an AI partner is if i told you, and that would get stricken down.

The legal issues are presumably part of the site's rationale for rejecting such content, as it would be a burden on them to have to weed out perhaps thousands of such stories in the event that the law eventually says they're violations.

Not sure how they are violations of the law.. As long as they aren't direct copies of works, and to avoid plagiarism it should be 25% different.

But roll a dice enough times and you'll get 100 6's in a row. It's just probability.

But the pertinent detail for someone submitting to the site is that they do not wish to host AI content, regardless of what the law someday decides.
Rewriting serviceable text to make it better is what writers do. Or it's what they pay an editor for.
Having an AI rewrite something for you may not seem like a misuse to you, but it does to others, and the site owners apparently consider it to be such. As such, their interpretation is the one that carries the day on their site.

Mhmm. I've heard the phrase 'AI Slop' and people generating videos and putting them on youtube and the like, some of it funny, some of it nonsense. But with CGI being a thing we've long since gotten past where you can trust everything with your eyes.

But in my mind, if it's well formed and curtailed rather than just random generation, and people like it, then it should be useful. But that's not my call to make.

It wouldn't be allowed on Lit, and thank god it is so. AO3 and possibly SOL allow AI-generated stories, so maybe you can indulge your ambitions and fantasies there. Or you can simply try to write stories without resorting to AI.

You know, there's nothing wrong with being just a reader. If you realize that you can't manage writing on your own, that's not the end of the world. I mean, I can't draw or paint for shit, but that doesn't stop me from fully enjoying other people's work.

If i don't get feedback, i can't write past a point; It's a mental block of mine, like the idea of kissing a guy just irks me. Sorry, just can't get past it.

I can't draw either. And i don't intend to share my stick drawings with the world. But if a tool can take a stick drawing and make a good cover for a book, and it won't cost me an arm and a leg. I'll probably take it.


But unless staff say otherwise i'll assume my ideas will have to be put on hold then. Too bad.

 

[Lifestyle66]

Occasionally someone will come to the AH or other LitE boards asking for someone else (an "author") to write their story idea for them. They have an idea or some details, and they want it turned into a good story.

Those are the types of people who benefit from AI writers. But you can't publish that as "your" story!

For a site like LitE, they want human generated stories! If one human is collaborating with another human even with role playing, and together they write a story, that's allowed. The entire creative process is done by humans. But as soon as you ask an AI to take on one of those creative roles, now it's drawing from the Internet or a machine algorithm for its portion which you're incorporating into the story.

If you in any way ask the AI to fix something or provide samples to incorporate into the story, it's no longer entirely a human written story.

To make use of an AI, write your story and ask the AI to provide a general critique. Use it like a beta-reader. Then take its criticism and re-write the story on your own to try appeasing it, until it no longer comes back with any criticisms.

EDIT: The problem which may cause LitE's policy against AI generated material would be if two different people ask the same AI to write a story for them, and they each give the AI the same outline and details. You would have two different people claiming "authorship" of the same general story!

 

[Bob_Aganoush]

Hmmm this does hinder what i had in mind to do then, unless the rules have changed or interpreted differently; To which i'd like to get a clarification/ruling before considering proceeding.


To start: I noticed long ago i have a big limitation in writing which is a major problem for me; I can write large complex portions (think the largest opener post i ever did was 22k), but i can't get past certain hurdles unless i get feedback, it's like having perpetual writer's block that i just can't get over. I need some type of interaction in order to proceed after certain points. To which my goto RP/ERP (on f-list primarily) has been quite fruitful and made me a much better writer in the last 15 years. Nevermind i haven't actually published anything of note, but I'm am seriously considering it. Regardless, without feedback i get stuck on chapter 1 or 2... and just can't proceed. If i walk away and come back (weeks or months later?) and reread it all, maybe i can do another chapter or two. But it will never get completed. And the concepts for the original idea would have long since died out or been forgotten.

So onto AI; In the last few months I've been tinkering with AI models that specialize in writing and RPing. And RP they can, some are very very happy and even eager to jump into NSFW content. I've been finding 70B+ models to write well enough i can't tell if it's written by an LLM (other than really obvious mistakes usually to do with anatomy, or some relationship in size) and can handle complex concepts. Though sometimes you need to remind them of really obvious stuff (ex: Lamia don't have feet. The character is sitting in my lap facing away so they can't straddle/hug me back like that). etc.

One nice thing to consider is that i don't need to ask permission from my partner as an AI if i could share/publish said work, vs only owning half of it. As well as i don't have to wait for them to be awake and in the mood to reply every 10-15 minutes for the 4 hours they are available.


So with that preamble out of the way; I assume this too would not be allowed then?

Why don’t you write your stories a chapter at a time, post them, and wait for the feedback before going on to the next chapter? Wouldn’t this solve your problem?

 

[yano2mch]

Occasionally someone will come to the AH or other LitE boards asking for someone else (an "author") to write their story idea for them. They have an idea or some details, and they want it turned into a good story.

EDIT: The problem which may cause LitE's policy against AI generated material would be if two different people ask the same AI to write a story for them, and they each give the AI the same outline and details. You would have two different people claiming "authorship" of the same general story!

I recall there being rule for this, where two people making the same work or invention separately unrelated to eachother, would both hold the copyright/ownership of it equally.

Though that would be rare but not impossible to do.

Things far shorter seem more likely for this to happen, say recipes. There's only so many ways you can write the ingredients and amounts for how to cook a turkey. A whole book? While unlikely not impossible, twins separated living different lives had been shown to live very similar lives and even end up with the same hand writing and writing some of the same contents.

Why don’t you write your stories a chapter at a time, post them, and wait for the feedback before going on to the next chapter? Wouldn’t this solve your problem?

A possible solution yes. That seems very plausable if i had say 10 things i was doing at once, and then rotating out. But i would prefer not to divide my attention.

But i won't have to divide my attention, sure we can assume that too. But do i really want to wait 1-4 weeks for feedback before i am able to resume writing a chapter? Same problem as i listed before in theory i can do that as i'm disconnected from the original work but i am unlikely to finish anything doing it that way.

Personal experience, if i don't touch the same thing within 3 days to resume it, or at least once a week, then it is basically dropped as everything about it has cooled, exact details aren't fresh in mind, plans of what directions it could be once i know how the characters i'll forget.

(edit note: Difference of 1-3 days and about 80% of all the information is retained only needing a quick look for certain details. 7 days, i retain 20% of the information, but a quick skim of the last 6 posts and i can resume where we left off unless there's important details, heavy summaries are needed then)

I'm reminded. I did an RP on f-list. I played a Fox capturing a bunny (Furry/anthro yes, but unimportant). My partner refused to reply except once every two weeks (even when i replied minutes after they did, they refused to reply for 2 weeks). I had to reread EVERY SINGLE WORD every two weeks in order to do a proper reply, and after the 8th reply i just had us hurry and finish it because i was sick of re-reading the entire thing over and over and over again.

I don't feel like subjecting myself to that again.

 

[Lifestyle66]

I recall there being rule for this, where two people making the same work or invention separately unrelated to eachother, would both hold the copyright/ownership of it equally.

Though that would be rare but not impossible to do.

Things far shorter seem more likely for this to happen, say recipes. There's only so many ways you can write the ingredients and amounts for how to cook a turkey. A whole book? While unlikely not impossible, twins separated living different lives had been shown to live very similar lives and even end up with the same hand writing and writing some of the same contents.

Reference the AI generating the same story for the same scenario for two different people is far more likely than two people writing it at the same time.

The machine algorithms pulling from the same sources for its "story" based on the same request?

Maybe you think your idea is unique. But with eight billion people in the world, how many might ask an AI for a story of their blonde bimbo trophy wife cheating with her Black gym trainer?

EDIT:

"AI, give me a story about my blonde bimbo trophy wife, Linda seducing her Black gym trainer, Darrel. We live in New York City, and he has a thick, ten-inch-long cock, and they meet every Tuesday evening when I have to work late."

"Is that at Gold's Gym? Or Planet Fitness?"

"Make it Gold's Gym!"

"Okay. Here's the five-hundredth version of that scenario within the past month. Note that at Planet Fitness, it would only have been the tenth version."

 

[Bamagan]

At the end of the day, the main reason for rejecting AI content is quite practical. Literotica posts 200 or more stories pretty much every day, and yes, some of them are not well made. Even the dreck takes a fair amount of time and effort to produce, though. Most of what AI makes is garbage, at least when you ask for more than a few sentences at a time, but it can serve it at the speed of light. Being more permissive with AI content would likely result in a significant increase in the amount of work required for moderation, as it would take much less effort to produce much more stuff. Taking an all-or-nothing stance is much simpler than deciding just how much computer-generated text is permissible, and it requires the least additional effort on the part of the site. Complaints or distress about the length of time stories spend under review is basically a daily feature here in the forums. Even if the volume of stories only doubled, that would be a big problem for everyone... except the people who couldn't be bothered to write something in the first place.

 

[Voboy]

I recall there being rule for this, where two people making the same work or invention separately unrelated to eachother, would both hold the copyright/ownership of it equally.

Though that would be rare but not impossible to do.

Things far shorter seem more likely for this to happen, say recipes. There's only so many ways you can write the ingredients and amounts for how to cook a turkey. A whole book? While unlikely not impossible, twins separated living different lives had been shown to live very similar lives and even end up with the same hand writing and writing some of the same contents.



A possible solution yes. That seems very plausable if i had say 10 things i was doing at once, and then rotating out. But i would prefer not to divide my attention.

But i won't have to divide my attention, sure we can assume that too. But do i really want to wait 1-4 weeks for feedback before i am able to resume writing a chapter? Same problem as i listed before in theory i can do that as i'm disconnected from the original work but i am unlikely to finish anything doing it that way.

Personal experience, if i don't touch the same thing within 3 days to resume it, or at least once a week, then it is basically dropped as everything about it has cooled, exact details aren't fresh in mind, plans of what directions it could be once i know how the characters i'll forget.

(edit note: Difference of 1-3 days and about 80% of all the information is retained only needing a quick look for certain details. 7 days, i retain 20% of the information, but a quick skim of the last 6 posts and i can resume where we left off unless there's important details, heavy summaries are needed then)

I'm reminded. I did an RP on f-list. I played a Fox capturing a bunny (Furry/anthro yes, but unimportant). My partner refused to reply except once every two weeks (even when i replied minutes after they did, they refused to reply for 2 weeks). I had to reread EVERY SINGLE WORD every two weeks in order to do a proper reply, and after the 8th reply i just had us hurry and finish it because i was sick of re-reading the entire thing over and over and over again.

Your process seems exhausting.

It's simple: write what you want to write, then post it. That's what we all do. If it's 100% yours, cool. If it's only 99% yours, not cool.

Fuck this idea of AI giving you a pat on the back for every little thing you do. You're better than that. Just write.

 

[yano2mch]

Reference the AI generating the same story for the same scenario for two different people is far more likely than two people writing it at the same time.

The machine algorithms pulling from the same sources for its "story" based on the same request?

Maybe you think your idea is unique. But with eight billion people in the world, how many might ask an AI for a story of their blonde bimbo trophy wife cheating with her Black gym trainer?

<snip>

"Okay. Here's the five-hundredth version of that scenario within the past month. Note that at Planet Fitness, it would only have been the tenth version."

I've only dipped my toes into the models and variants being generated. You don't understand how much processing power they take to run these (cloud or locally); Or how many gigabytes each decent model takes up, and the sheer raw number of seeds the RNG could be just in 32bits.

And the weaker models, yes are easier and faster, but definitely outputting low quality, fail at concepts, or have heavy repeats of words and phrases.

At the end of the day, the main reason for rejecting AI content is quite practical. Literotica posts 200 or more stories pretty much every day, and yes, some of them are not well made. Even the dreck takes a fair amount of time and effort to produce, though. Most of what AI makes is garbage, at least when you ask for more than a few sentences at a time, but it can serve it at the speed of light. Being more permissive with AI content would likely result in a significant increase in the amount of work required for moderation, as it would take much less effort to produce much more stuff. Taking an all-or-nothing stance is much simpler than deciding just how much computer-generated text is permissible, and it requires the least additional effort on the part of the site. Complaints or distress about the length of time stories spend under review is basically a daily feature here in the forums. Even if the volume of stories only doubled, that would be a big problem for everyone... except the people who couldn't be bothered to write something in the first place.

Speed of light... far from it.

I run my own LLM's locally, and i usually get 2 tokens a second (about 10 characters a second). That's not lightning fast. That's about as fast as if i roleplayed with someone on F-list, or about a post every 10-15 minutes. (Mind you i found some 70B models that are decent enough, while smaller ones to run faster are speedier but you can just tell are lower quality, plus the sheer number of mistakes they make).

Could i get it to be faster? Sure... how many thousands should i invest in GPUs and more memory? That would do it if i want to dump $10k into hardware; But the output other than being a bit faster (maybe 10x, so instead of 2/second i get 20/second) the quality of the output doesn't change.

I do suppose i could use the cloud services of Grok or GPT or others, and then be under their censorship rules and regulations of whatever they give; On top of being spied on.

Also you are right, longer outputs tend to be more broken up and less structured. But RP post length (1000 characters or less) seems to output pretty well. Well longer contexts also make shorter outputs over time too.

Your process seems exhausting.

It's simple: write what you want to write, then post it. That's what we all do. If it's 100% yours, cool. If it's only 99% yours, not cool.

Fuck this idea of AI giving you a pat on the back for every little thing you do. You're better than that. Just write.

I'm not going for a 'pat on the back'. I just don't see being able to create much independently without it. Of what i have put out (when i was considerably younger) just makes me wince looking at now and the same writer's block got in the way since i was 14. I have gotten some feedback, but it's not sufficient to resume from.

This is like the difference of having a DM narrating what is going on Vs you going solo D&D play. It's worlds difference in details brought up that you now interact with that you didn't think of before, or just the interactivity of it. (It's also a lot like masturbation. If you do it yourself it works, but someone else doing it and you can't predict how hard where or anything, so it's more exciting).

 

[Lifestyle66]

I've only dipped my toes into the models and variants being generated. You don't understand how much processing power they take to run these (cloud or locally); Or how many gigabytes each decent model takes up, and the sheer raw number of seeds the RNG could be just in 32bits.

And the weaker models, yes are easier and faster, but definitely outputting low quality, fail at concepts, or have heavy repeats of words and phrases.

You don't appear to have understood or reacted to my point about AI.

To be clear, when two humans separately come up with a similar idea and write their stories, based on their different backgrounds and experiences those two stories will likely be very different in their final, published form. It will be very clear if one author plagiarizes another's work, because it is extremely unlikely two people would independently cobble together exactly the same thousands of words.


But when using AI, this is not the case. Two people independently feeding the same cloud-based AI the same simple scenario will very possibly get the same computer-generated output. Then the fight becomes: Who has the legal right to claim authorship?