Seeking Advice - German Literotica Community Facing Mass AI Rejections

[Japakl75]

The problem isn't really the AI, but the breakdown in communication between operator and user. If a dialogue could be established here, a quick solution could be sought. But silence is the order of the day here. This is how the evil runs its course, and brain drain occurs, which will harm the site. On the other hand, this is how new platforms develop; perhaps we simply have to look at it that way.

 

[TheWritingGroup]

... But if it were only marketed for those purposes, the manufacturers would go broke, so they mislead people about what it is and isn't fit for.

Good news: they are broke. It just doesn't matter during a bubble. OpenAI, the leading company, has revenue of $12 billion annually. Revenue, not profit, there's no profit. They're valued at $500 billion. They only continue to operate because nVidia props them up with huge investments, which some analysts would argue is done to prop up nVidia chip prices.

--Annie "Just learned those numbers this morning"

 

[Bramblethorn]

As if misleading marketing was exclusively done by tech-companies...

Where did I ever say it was?

and you said it right there:

makes it really easy for people to generate untrustworthy-but-convincing content at high volume.

It's not the tech. It's the people using it.

It is, in fact, both. If I make cluster bombs optimised for blowing off children's hands, I don't get to absolve myself by telling myself that "it's not the tech, it's the people using it".

When the design of the tech makes it particularly easy for shitty people to use it for shitty purposes - relative to any good it might do - then the designers and the promoters of the tech absolutely do bear responsibility. (The shitty people using it also get to bear responsibility. There is no law of ethics that says only one person can be blamed.)

When the design of the tech also makes it easy for well-meaning people to use it in good faith and get dangerous but plausible-seeming garbage, then the designers and the promoters bear responsibility for that too.

You don't need to be enthusiastic about AI. You simply need to acknowledge that it is not going away anytime soon, instead of playing the blame-game.

Once again, you are overlooking the power of "both".

 

[Bramblethorn]

Good news: they are broke. It just doesn't matter during a bubble. OpenAI, the leading company, has revenue of $12 billion annually. Revenue, not profit, there's no profit. They're valued at $500 billion. They only continue to operate because nVidia props them up with huge investments, which some analysts would argue is done to prop up nVidia chip prices.

--Annie "Just learned those numbers this morning"

Yep. Unfortunately the splash radius when this bubble bursts is going to be huge.

 

[Djinn68]

Where did I ever say it was?

If it's not "a special feature" of the "techbros", I can't see why they should be held to any other standard than any other company on this planet - concerning marketing, of course.

It is, in fact, both. If I make cluster bombs optimised for blowing off children's hands, I don't get to absolve myself by telling myself that "it's not the tech, it's the people using it".

The comparison is highly fallacious. Or - can you tell me any good use for cluster-bombs? Fishing?

When the design of the tech makes it particularly easy for shitty people to use it for shitty purposes - relative to any good it might do - then the designers and the promoters of the tech absolutely do bear responsibility. (The shitty people using it also get to bear responsibility. There is no law of ethics that says only one person can be blamed.)

When the design of the tech also makes it easy for well-meaning people to use it in good faith and get dangerous but plausible-seeming garbage, then the designers and the promoters bear responsibility for that too.

You can use all tech for bad purposes, be it computer, cars, youtube, you name it...

Once again, you are overlooking the power of "both".

Once again, the blame-game seems to be more important to you than facing reality. It is here to stay and is not going away anytime soon. We all have to learn to deal with it.

Sure, in the worst-case-scenario they might have openend pandoras box. So? If "they take responsability for it", will it change anything?

But, probably, in the end you and me will have to agree to disagree about our views on this topic. To you the last word on the matter.

 

[jsmiam]

…
To be honest: AI has made my life easier: At work, as well as writing my stories. Just to clarify: I write every single word of my stories myself, but I do use AI for research, analysis, feedback….

To come full circle. Perhaps you really used AI and typed in or otherwise altered your writing based on the AI feedback. Unknowingly or unconsciously perhaps. But this comment changes at the very least my perception of your innocence here.

But clearly there seems to be an issue, since there are so many others in the German author community having trouble, whose claims of no AI are actually no AI.

 

[Djinn68]

To come full circle. Perhaps you really used AI and typed in or otherwise altered your writing based on the AI feedback. Unknowingly or unconsciously perhaps. But this comment changes at the very least my perception of your innocence here.

But clearly there seems to be an issue, since there are so many others in the German author community having trouble, whose claims of no AI are actually no AI.

Of my ... innocence? They are still my words, my thoughts - my story. I conceived the sentences, the plot. I didn't enter some prompt and copy the output of the machine into my story. Was I influenced by it? Sure. But then, where is the line drawn? Do we need to become some sort of ... human purists?

"Fun" fact: Lit states that it wants "stories written by humans, for humans". But it is a machine that decides, if a story is "human enough". Not just that: Some users (in the german part of the forum) have found a "solution" to the AI-rejection-problem - by using so-called "humanizer-programs" to go over their stories, before submittig them (or after having them rejected). Meaning - they let a machine write "human" sentences for them, to pass the test of another machine. And this, takes Lits claim to absurdity...

 

[Robin_Starveling]

"Fun" fact: Lit states that it wants "stories written by humans, for humans". But it is a machine that decides, if a story is "human enough". Not just that: Some users (in the german part of the forum) have found a "solution" to the AI-rejection-problem - by using so-called "humanizer-programs" to go over their stories, before submittig them (or after having them rejected). Meaning - they let a machine write "human" sentences for them, to pass the test of another machine. And this, takes Lits claim to absurdity.

This is beyond sad. The irony is lost on the Luddites. They won’t change their minds, not even when the ship sinks and they find themselves swallowed by the beast.

 

[Bramblethorn]

If it's not "a special feature" of the "techbros", I can't see why they should be held to any other standard than any other company on this planet - concerning marketing, of course.

Absolutely. Anybody who misrepresents their product as badly as the current wave of LLM marketers misrepresent theirs should be shamed, and probably jailed.

The comparison is highly fallacious. Or - can you tell me any good use for cluster-bombs? Fishing?

See, if you really believed AI was good at research you wouldn't be asking me that question.

You can use all tech for bad purposes, be it computer, cars, youtube, you name it...

 

[Japakl75]

My new story section has now been rejected for the second time. So I will now stop my work in German erotica. It was a wonderful year, I gained a lot of experience, so it wasn't all in vain.



I just feel sorry for my readers. But all I can do is point out the problem and hope for change.



I wish you all the best and thank you once again for trying to help.



Regards, Jan

 

[onehitwanda]

My new story section has now been rejected for the second time. So I will now stop my work in German erotica. It was a wonderful year, I gained a lot of experience, so it wasn't all in vain.



I just feel sorry for my readers. But all I can do is point out the problem and hope for change.



I wish you all the best and thank you once again for trying to help.



Regards, Jan

I really hope you will reconsider, let the current mess settle for a month or so, and then try again But either way, take care!

 

[Japakl75]

I'll give it a try. Thank you for your kind words.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

"Fun" fact: Lit states that it wants "stories written by humans, for humans". But it is a machine that decides, if a story is "human enough". Not just that: Some users (in the german part of the forum) have found a "solution" to the AI-rejection-problem - by using so-called "humanizer-programs" to go over their stories, before submittig them (or after having them rejected). Meaning - they let a machine write "human" sentences for them, to pass the test of another machine. And this, takes Lits claim to absurdity...

Do you know this for certain? Because if it's true, it's beyond sad. It means that, as much as I support the no-AI policy, trying to detect it is a losing strategy, and it kinda throws a wrench into the claim that Lit's AI-detector does a good job, which I also disputed before.

But what's the alternative?

 

[Japakl75]

The alternative would be a warning notice stating that the written text could be AI. This would give readers the choice and allow them to form their own opinion. In the current situation, however, it degenerates into book burning like in the Third Reich.

 

[AwkwardMD]

The alternative would be a warning notice stating that the written text could be AI. This would give readers the choice and allow them to form their own opinion. In the current situation, however, it degenerates into book burning like in the Third Reich.

I did not expect an 11th hour "if you don’t allow AI writing then maybe you're the real nazi" turn for this thread. I think we can all go home now.

 

[TheLobster]

I did not expect an 11th hour "if you don’t allow AI writing then maybe you're the real nazi"

Perhaps LLM is actually recursive acronym meaning "LLM Lives Matter"?

 

[Japakl75]

But why? I never mentioned Nazis. It's the act itself that I was referring to. When someone takes it upon themselves to decide what people are allowed to read and what they are not, that comes pretty close to this act. I think very few stories were written by AI, perhaps corrected or slightly altered, but this means that they are not being read.

 

[StillStunned]

But why? I never mentioned Nazis. It's the act itself that I was referring to. When someone takes it upon themselves to decide what people are allowed to read and what they are not, that comes pretty close to this act. I think very few stories were written by AI, perhaps corrected or slightly altered, but this means that they are not being read.

Lit isn't deciding what people may or may not read. They're just taking a firm stance on what they will and will not publish, what content they're willing to host on their site. Every publisher in history has exercised the right to choose what they attach their name to, and Lit's doing the same.

 

[Djinn68]

Do you know this for certain? Because if it's true, it's beyond sad. It means that, as much as I support the no-AI policy, trying to detect it is a losing strategy, and it kinda throws a wrench into the claim that Lit's AI-detector does a good job, which I also disputed before.

But what's the alternative?

As I have not done this myself, I cannot claim certainty, but that's what I read in the german forums - as well as postings of users who submitted stories they (at least allegedly) wrote in 2018 - when AI was but the wet dream of some so-called techbros in their labs - and that where rejected because of the use of AI.

Literoticas filtering process is not simply broken: it just doesn't work. It's a utopia. It's pure chance, if it catches something substantially written by AI or it lets something written by HI through. Nothing more. and it is simply in the nature of things that such filtering is not possible.

AI generated prose does not exist: Machines were fed with prose created by humans. And for every sentence I write in this posting there is a high probability that the same sentence has been written by someone else, somewhere else, sometimes else. There is only a limited number of combinations for words to be put in a sentence - and make some sort of sense. If I write "I love you" and a machine writes "I love you", who's sentence is it?

When the fifth part of my series was first rejected, I was angry. Later on, I was desperate (because of what it has meant to me personally to write in the last two year and to share it with appreciative readers here. The catarthic effect it has had...), then again, I felt hurt that my integrity as a writer, perhaps even as a human being, had been called into question. Sometimes later I simply felt bitter.

By now I have made peace with the situation. It is, what it is. Some sadness lingers on - but that's it. I found a new home for my stories - and, as aforementioned - I will remove all my stories here, but the last one, written for this ... occasion.

Might I come back, if things get better? Maybe, I don't know. But Lit has lost the number one spot on my publishing list for good. This AI-witchhunt was the last straw. I could accept the ... unresponsiveness (they must be busy, they can't answer every feedback, right?). I could live with the constant systematic downvoting, although it could easily be resolved by allowing only registered users to vote (once for every story). But now this? Enough is enough - and that's not coming out of bitterness. It's just the realisation that this relationship (between me and Lit) isn't as beneficial as it felt at the start of this journey.

I am deeply thankful to Lit for the time I was able to spend here. For the interactions I had with my readers. For many new real-life-friends I found. I'm sad, but I need to move on. One last small window is still open, but I do not place too much hope in it. Life is too short, and I want to get back to writing (which right now I can't, because I'm too busy transferring my existing stories to my new home).

 

[Bramblethorn]

In the current situation, however, it degenerates into book burning like in the Third Reich.

I never mentioned Nazis.

This is a level of hair-splitting that Planck wouldn't have considered possible.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I could accept the ... unresponsiveness (they must be busy, they can't answer every feedback, right?). I could live with the constant systematic downvoting, although it could easily be resolved by allowing only registered users to vote (once for every story). But now this? Enough is enough - and that's not coming out of bitterness. It's just the realisation that this relationship (between me and Lit) isn't as beneficial as it felt at the start of this journey.

Meh, I don't know what to tell you. I understand being disappointed with Lit very well; I've been there.

My own greatest issue with Literotica is its long-standing tradition of keeping both authors and readers in the dark about everything. No communication, no sincerity, no appreciation. If Lit were silent about some things only, like its AI strategy, approval process, etc., I'd understand it. But their silence and non-responsiveness are all-encompassing.

The best advice I can give you is not to go for the scorched-earth approach with your stories.
Lit isn't as welcoming as many of us thought - that's true, but the same can be said for any other story-publishing place, more or less. You'll see that the grass isn't really greener anywhere else, and that's the source of the problem for us, authors - the lack of competition.
Lit is great in some ways, but it also sucks in some ways, and what little competition Lit has is hardly any better.

 

[Bramblethorn]

There is only a limited number of combinations for words to be put in a sentence - and make some sort of sense. If I write "I love you" and a machine writes "I love you", who's sentence is it?

For sentences longer than about half a dozen words, that "limited number" is so huge as to make the chances of coincidental duplication extremely small. If two different texts contain the same ten-word sentence, one can be pretty sure that one was influenced by the other, or that both are influenced by some third source.

 

[Djinn68]

Meh, I don't know what to tell you. I understand being disappointed with Lit very well; I've been there.

My own greatest issue with Literotica is its long-standing tradition of keeping both authors and readers in the dark about everything. No communication, no sincerity, no appreciation. If Lit were silent about some things only, like its AI strategy, approval process, etc., I'd understand it. But their silence and non-responsiveness are all-encompassing.

The best advice I can give you is not to go for the scorched-earth approach with your stories.
Lit isn't as welcoming as many of us thought - that's true, but the same can be said for any other story-publishing place, more or less. You'll see that the grass isn't really greener anywhere else, and that's the source of the problem for us, authors - the lack of competition.
Lit is great in some ways, but it also sucks in some ways, and what little competition Lit has is hardly any better.

I understand why my approach might seem like scorched-earth, a way to get back at Lit. But, to me, it's a matter of principles. If my integrity as an author has been called into question in one story, then surely it calls into question all my other stories as well. At least all the ones published before the implementation of this ... AI-filter.

I'm sure that, with this action, the 'net loss' is bigger for me than for Lit. But, for me ... it simply feels acting consequential.