"AI" Rejection

[AG31]

https://arstechnica.com/information...-think-the-us-constitution-was-written-by-ai/

Most of them use a combination of checking for "perplexity" and "burstiness."





The bottom line, from the article, is this:



I wrote a bunch on this (and why they mostly suck), my own process, the witch hunt issue, and more over at https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-26#post-97985369 and in later parts of that thread, mostly in the process of disassembling a witchhunter's arguments.

Some other key posts:

My process, which utilizes tools in a way that Laurel has no problems with, and which has never gotten dinged as AI: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-19#post-97969898

Non-writing places where AI detection/assessment has failed horribly: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-24#post-97976494

A primer on how ChatGPT works in the first place: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-24#post-97979855

A quick assessment of the tool the witchhunter was trying to say "proved" that I and others used AI text generators, flagging all but one of the top 10 most read stories on the site (the newest of which was posted in 2009): https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-28#post-97991991

My thoughts on the hypocrisy of "purists" saying we had to conform to their preferred tools: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/ai-allegations-thread.1599778/page-28#post-97992782

And, over in another thread, the way that I did use AI in artwork, how I did, and the things I'm still wrestling with: https://forum.literotica.com/threads/about-that-ai-assist-in-writing.1600310/post-97980469

I'm probably going to turn all of this into an essay at some point. Loving AI, here I come!

Thanks so much!!

 

[regularguy13]

I too am a victim. My Valentine Day stories were reject do to AI concerns. These stories were produced no differently than my other stories. I use Google Docs and run the finished tale through Grammarly (the free version) for a spell and grammar check. The version I use does not rewrite the story or suggest alternate wording. It catches the stupid mistakes I'm prone to make as I am thinking about the story and not 'i after e, except after c'.

I re-summitted them and said this is my work. It'd be a shame if I had to include my spellllllling errors just to prove a human wrote the story. I'll let you know if offering to show the rough drafts and my pledge that it's my work gets the stories posted. r

 

[DaedalusX]

Reflecting on my recent return to this site after a month-long hiatus, it's evident that the frustrating situation I hoped would be resolved still persists. At least based on the sheer volume of threads mirroring this one. I am fairly sure that it is the perceived arbitrary nature of the all-powerful Gatekeeper and their continued silence that makes it a far more detestable situation. I have witnessed countless claims from a plethora of members stating that they have attempted to contact this Laurel person with no response. So, quite honestly, fuck them.

However, this period has not been without its silver linings. My writings, initially rejected by the Gatekeeper, found a new path to readership through self-publication. The reception has been encouraging, more than just satisfactory.

I initially sought to contribute my tales to this community, inspired by the countless stories I enjoyed here over the years. My aspiration was simple: to connect with others through the myriad of narratives I have to offer – a tapestry of real experiences, semi-fictional accounts, and outright fabrications. While I don't claim to be an exceptional writer, I am someone brimming with stories eager to be shared.

Yet, what deeply troubles me is the fallout of my inactivity. Several members confided in me via DM or email, alleging serious repercussions for voicing their grievances on this platform. While I cannot confirm these claims, I choose to trust their claims as I have no reason to suspect a handful of people all claiming the same thing are in a conspiracy... especially directing their warnings to me, a complete unknown on this site. This concern partly fueled my decision to stay away for the past month. I returned to read over the forums and see what was going on. From the looks of it, the situation is normal - all fucked up.

The situation is indeed disheartening. I've been an active participant in this community, not just as a reader but also by supporting authors through purchasing their books linked in signatures. But the time has come to seek new avenues for sharing and engaging, just as many others here are endeavoring to do.

Perhaps when the all-mighty Gatekeeper sees their ad revenue drop sharply because everyone is leaving, they will have the common fucking decency to address the issue with the people that actually matter on here and pay their bills - the creators that they ignore and devalue.

Anyhoo, that's all for me folks. Off to much bigger and far better pastures. I'll miss the forums and stories here, but such is the way of things.

 

[XerXesXu]

Reflecting on my recent return to this site after a month-long hiatus, it's evident that the frustrating situation I hoped would be resolved still persists. At least based on the sheer volume of threads mirroring this one. I am fairly sure that it is the perceived arbitrary nature of the all-powerful Gatekeeper and their continued silence that makes it a far more detestable situation. I have witnessed countless claims from a plethora of members stating that they have attempted to contact this Laurel person with no response. So, quite honestly, fuck them.

However, this period has not been without its silver linings. My writings, initially rejected by the Gatekeeper, found a new path to readership through self-publication. The reception has been encouraging, more than just satisfactory.

I initially sought to contribute my tales to this community, inspired by the countless stories I enjoyed here over the years. My aspiration was simple: to connect with others through the myriad of narratives I have to offer – a tapestry of real experiences, semi-fictional accounts, and outright fabrications. While I don't claim to be an exceptional writer, I am someone brimming with stories eager to be shared.

Yet, what deeply troubles me is the fallout of my inactivity. Several members confided in me via DM or email, alleging serious repercussions for voicing their grievances on this platform. While I cannot confirm these claims, I choose to trust their claims as I have no reason to suspect a handful of people all claiming the same thing are in a conspiracy... especially directing their warnings to me, a complete unknown on this site. This concern partly fueled my decision to stay away for the past month. I returned to read over the forums and see what was going on. From the looks of it, the situation is normal - all fucked up.

The situation is indeed disheartening. I've been an active participant in this community, not just as a reader but also by supporting authors through purchasing their books linked in signatures. But the time has come to seek new avenues for sharing and engaging, just as many others here are endeavoring to do.

Perhaps when the all-mighty Gatekeeper sees their ad revenue drop sharply because everyone is leaving, they will have the common fucking decency to address the issue with the people that actually matter on here and pay their bills - the creators that they ignore and devalue.

Anyhoo, that's all for me folks. Off to much bigger and far better pastures. I'll miss the forums and stories here, but such is the way of things.

Thanks for the advert. Take this kindly, your blurb is as good as others achieve with a well-engineered GPT prompt.

 

[loerics]

I just had two stories rejected. One was a resubmit, that I made minor changes to after being accused of AI usage and the other was the sequel to that story.

I did use Grammarly to check for grammar but I didn’t change wordings or anything. I don’t know what to do. When I resubmitted the story I attested that I didn’t use Ai but it still got rejected.

The rejection mentioned possibly using an editor to fix the issue. Has anyone ever gone this route?

How is an editor going to help when no one knows what gets you flagged for AI content? Let us know how it works out.

 

[storyteller92]

How is an editor going to help when no one knows what gets you flagged for AI content? Let us know how it works out.

I have used a proofreader and an editor. My proofreader uses the F7 button, and my editor, highlights, pints, and red markers stuff, and still it gets flagged for AI. The best I can suggest is using multiple AI detectors and sharing the results in the notes when you submit it, and cross your fingers.
Otherwise, I don't know what else to do.
For AI Detectors:
https://quillbot.com/ai-content-detector
https://gptzero.me/
https://gpt-zero.org/

 

[Sooreaver]

I too am a victim. My Valentine Day stories were reject do to AI concerns. These stories were produced no differently than my other stories. I use Google Docs and run the finished tale through Grammarly (the free version) for a spell and grammar check. The version I use does not rewrite the story or suggest alternate wording. It catches the stupid mistakes I'm prone to make as I am thinking about the story and not 'i after e, except after c'.

I re-summitted them and said this is my work. It'd be a shame if I had to include my spellllllling errors just to prove a human wrote the story. I'll let you know if offering to show the rough drafts and my pledge that it's my work gets the stories posted.

Man, that sounds frustrating! It's crazy how AI can sometimes give false alarms. I feel you, especially when you put your heart into your stories. It's like getting rejected for no fault of your own. I've had my fair share of battles with automated systems too. Sometimes, they just don't get it right. Offering to show your rough drafts is a smart move. It proves you're the real deal behind those words. Hang in there, and don't let these glitches discourage your creativity. Also, have you considered trying out https://customwriting.com/ai-essay-writer AI essay writer? It might offer a fresh perspective and help avoid these hiccups. Keep pushing, your Valentine's Day tales deserve to be heard!

 

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

I had one rejected, I reworked a few lines, had my editor go through it, who changed a few other lines, and it went through fined.

 

[storyteller92]

I've had a similar experience with my submissions being flagged for AI concerns. It's really frustrating, especially since like you, I use basic tools like Google Docs and Grammarly just to catch those little errors. I don't rely on anything that rewrites my work or alters my voice. It's like they don't trust us to write well without assuming it's AI-generated. I wonder if this is becoming a common issue for many of us who write and self-edit. It'd be interesting to see if showing rough drafts and pledging originality helps.

So...With AI getting worse, this is only going to get harder. I have had some stories flagged when I wrote them and pressed the F7 button, so I have been pushing some unedited versions and they fly right on through. For my longer stories, I just run them through MULTIPLE AI detectors and just put the scores in my moderator notes. I think under 15% is the bar, but I can't be sure.
For my longer stories, I have to write them, check them, and usually we are at the 2% mark, but once you have good grammar and spelling, you're at 5-9% usually. It is a matter of how much you want to check. With the new GPT 4(?), I think...It will get harder. My suggestion is to create a style, let them see the unedited version and hope there is enough trust to see you through to continued publishing. I don't know the answer beyond that.

 

[AmonKo]

I got those rejections from literotica all the time. So I am done

 

[Aimee2006]

Firstly, a genuine question, does anyone know a publishing house that has not laid off its in-house illustrators in favour of AI?
I have a Ukrainian artist friend with a need for work as an illustrator in order to get a new hip. He was laid off by the Italian children's book publishing house he worked for, along with every other artist on their books, and replaced by AI.
He has talent but cannot take commissions because he now has to work outside of the art world .
https://www.deviantart.com/yuriplatov

Secondly, and neatly following on from the first question, how are self-publishing authors to get original covers and illustrations if there is nowhere else to go now except AI or you neighbours kid who got B in art for his pro-recycling mobile?

 

[Aimee2006]

Reflecting on my recent return to this site after a month-long hiatus, it's evident that the frustrating situation I hoped would be resolved still persists. At least based on the sheer volume of threads mirroring this one. I am fairly sure that it is the perceived arbitrary nature of the all-powerful Gatekeeper and their continued silence that makes it a far more detestable situation. I have witnessed countless claims from a plethora of members stating that they have attempted to contact this Laurel person with no response. So, quite honestly, fuck them.

However, this period has not been without its silver linings. My writings, initially rejected by the Gatekeeper, found a new path to readership through self-publication. The reception has been encouraging, more than just satisfactory.

I initially sought to contribute my tales to this community, inspired by the countless stories I enjoyed here over the years. My aspiration was simple: to connect with others through the myriad of narratives I have to offer – a tapestry of real experiences, semi-fictional accounts, and outright fabrications. While I don't claim to be an exceptional writer, I am someone brimming with stories eager to be shared.

Yet, what deeply troubles me is the fallout of my inactivity. Several members confided in me via DM or email, alleging serious repercussions for voicing their grievances on this platform. While I cannot confirm these claims, I choose to trust their claims as I have no reason to suspect a handful of people all claiming the same thing are in a conspiracy... especially directing their warnings to me, a complete unknown on this site. This concern partly fueled my decision to stay away for the past month. I returned to read over the forums and see what was going on. From the looks of it, the situation is normal - all fucked up.

The situation is indeed disheartening. I've been an active participant in this community, not just as a reader but also by supporting authors through purchasing their books linked in signatures. But the time has come to seek new avenues for sharing and engaging, just as many others here are endeavoring to do.

Perhaps when the all-mighty Gatekeeper sees their ad revenue drop sharply because everyone is leaving, they will have the common fucking decency to address the issue with the people that actually matter on here and pay their bills - the creators that they ignore and devalue.

Anyhoo, that's all for me folks. Off to much bigger and far better pastures. I'll miss the forums and stories here, but such is the way of things.

It sounds like your work had merit, which is a kiss of death.

Resubmit as DaedalusX the Illiterate, a non-digital non-binary furry woodland creature with a permanent limp except on weekends and they must then accept all works or suffer the wrath of the God, DEI.

 

[Bramblethorn]

So here's a thing...

On May 20th, Sooreaver posted:

I've had a similar experience with my submissions being flagged for AI concerns. It's really frustrating, especially since like you, I use basic tools like Google Docs and Grammarly just to catch those little errors. I don't rely on anything that rewrites my work or alters my voice. It's like they don't trust us to write well without assuming it's AI-generated. I wonder if this is becoming a common issue for many of us who write and self-edit. It'd be interesting to see if showing rough drafts and pledging originality helps.

On Monday, they went back and edited that post to:

Man, that sounds frustrating! It's crazy how AI can sometimes give false alarms. I feel you, especially when you put your heart into your stories. It's like getting rejected for no fault of your own. I've had my fair share of battles with automated systems too. Sometimes, they just don't get it right. Offering to show your rough drafts is a smart move. It proves you're the real deal behind those words. Hang in there, and don't let these glitches discourage your creativity. Also, have you considered trying out [spam link deleted]? It might offer a fresh perspective and help avoid these hiccups. Keep pushing, your Valentine's Day tales deserve to be heard!

This is a SEO spammer. They'll show up, make some posts on a popular thread - anything that's easy to write and doesn't stand out - and then a couple of weeks later they'll go back and edit those posts to add in a spam link for SEO purposes. If you see people pulling this shit, please report the accounts (not just the individual posts - click through to their account page and report from there).

Meanwhile, it makes it all the harder to gauge the real extent of the AI-rejection problem, if we have spammers posting fake rejection reports here just to hold the space for their linkspam.

 

[Britva415]

He has talent but cannot take commissions because he now has to work outside of the art world .
https://www.deviantart.com/yuriplatov

Secondly, and neatly following on from the first question, how are self-publishing authors to get original covers and illustrations if there is nowhere else to go now except AI or you neighbours kid who got B in art for his pro-recycling mobile?

I don't understand this notion of "having to work outside the art world." Are you saying that there's no work for him because anyone who would ever want a commission is going to use AI instead? Or are you saying that he's somehow banned/blocked from being employed to do someone's commission?

And following on to the second question, what do you mean "there's nowhere else to go?" Why wouldn't artists continue to take commissions as long as there are people willing to pay for them? Why wouldn't buyers be able to continue to hire artists for commissions? You're again making it sound like someone has outlawed working as an artist like it's no longer allowed.

You've postulated artists who want to work as artists, and buyers who would pay them to, if that was an available option. What would keep these people from conducting business together?

 

[ElectricBlue]

You've postulated artists who want to work as artists, and buyers who would pay them to, if that was an available option. What would keep these people from conducting business together?

There are clues in the account name and the post count which suggest an eager newcomer on the one metre diving board, wanting to arrive with a splash.

Or, it's an advertorial for someone on deviantart...

 

[Bramblethorn]

I don't understand this notion of "having to work outside the art world." Are you saying that there's no work for him because anyone who would ever want a commission is going to use AI instead? Or are you saying that he's somehow banned/blocked from being employed to do someone's commission?

I don't know this specific artist or his situation, and I was also wondering about the advertorial possibility that EB mentioned. @Aimee2006, if you're genuine, please be aware that it can look a bit sus to people who don't know you when your first post here is plugging somebody's portfolio.

But what Aimee's saying doesn't seem implausible. Obviously competition from AI hurts the opportunities available to human artists (all the rougher when that AI has been trained on their works and can even be prompted to do art "in the style of..."). It doesn't cut the demand for human-drawn art to zero, but it can cut it to the point where somebody who was previously able to make a living as an artist is no longer able to make ends meet, and needs to find some other job.

If they don't have much experience outside graphic art, those "other job" options are often not great, and if they're having to work a 60-hour week doing something crappy to put bread on the table, they're not likely to have a lot left in the tank for doing commission work even when the opportunities arise.

Also, making pro-level visual art usually costs money for tools. Software like Photoshop/Creative Cloud can cost hundreds a year for licensing (adding insult to injury, Adobe recently put the price up because they've added AI tools to the suite...) and if an artist isn't getting enough commissions to pay those license costs, they may need to let that go altogether.

And following on to the second question, what do you mean "there's nowhere else to go?" Why wouldn't artists continue to take commissions as long as there are people willing to pay for them? Why wouldn't buyers be able to continue to hire artists for commissions? You're again making it sound like someone has outlawed working as an artist like it's no longer allowed.

You've postulated artists who want to work as artists, and buyers who would pay them to, if that was an available option. What would keep these people from conducting business together?

Partly answered above, but also: even where you have buyers who are willing to pay for non-AI-based art, and artists who want to do that art, there are also a lot of people who'll use AI and claim they didn't. It can be difficult for a buyer to get past that dishonesty to find genuine no-AI artists. For instance, the SF magazine Clarkesworld has a "no AI" policy that people have to agree to when submitting stories or cover art, but they ended up having to pull the cover for their 200th issue because an artist lied to them and sold them an AI-based illustration, and it wasn't caught until after publication. That's a contract that some other more honest artist missed out on.

IIRC, the guy who provided that cover was in fact a good artist with a solid record of pre-AI work, but I guess he decided he could make more money by using AI tools to shortcut things.

If it gets bad enough, it can kill the opportunities altogether. Here's a story about an annual contest for self-published fantasy book cover art: in 2023 the winner was disqualified after being exposed as having lied about use of AI, and the contest organiser decided to stop running that contest because he doesn't want to spend his time trying to figure out what is/isn't AI. The article mentions another cover contest which looked like being abandoned for the same reason, not sure how that one worked out.

 

[Britva415]

what Aimee's saying doesn't seem implausible

I can't figure out what they're saying, so I asked for clarification.

 

[Aimee2006]

I don't understand this notion of "having to work outside the art world." Are you saying that there's no work for him because anyone who would ever want a commission is going to use AI instead? Or are you saying that he's somehow banned/blocked from being employed to do someone's commission?

And following on to the second question, what do you mean "there's nowhere else to go?" Why wouldn't artists continue to take commissions as long as there are people willing to pay for them? Why wouldn't buyers be able to continue to hire artists for commissions? You're again making it sound like someone has outlawed working as an artist like it's no longer allowed.

You've postulated artists who want to work as artists, and buyers who would pay them to, if that was an available option. What would keep these people from conducting business together?

You really do not understand the realities of life and business or are you are just being argumentative?

I will play the devil's advocate for a bit.

He lost his home in the Russian invasion and is in a holiday resort/refugee camp in the EU where he managed to get full-time work with an Italian publisher, earning enough to have the original damaged hip replaced in a EU clinic because the EU hospital waiting lists are now huge due to immigration.
However, after years of compensating for the bad hip the 'good' hip had become deformed so he was effectively no better off. Unfortunately he was then replaced by AI before he could earn enough for a second operation.
He is trying to learn carpentry as well as doing computer repairs and really does not have the time left in a day to do artwork. The most I can do is offer charity but he still has his pride, so....

As to those remaining human artists it is a case of supply and demand. The cost of commissions has sky-rocketed and even without illustrations a decent original book cover for a self published book went from $250 to $1000.

The case for illustrations in literature is that people do not buy Conan the Barbarian books to look at Frank Frazetta's interpretation of 'beauty' as a 30-something post natal gymnasium and fitness centre phobic hag, they buy them for stories in the written word where the illustrations serve to focus the reader on the time line and fictional setting.
From a writers point of view, and my Ukrainian friends hates me for this, how is cheap Ai that does a better job than old Frankie, in anyway cheating, especially if hours on expensive art apps is required to transform AI's interpretation of something into a more realistic vista?

There are cases for and against AI but a form of apartheid keeping less well-off artists from affordable artwork is simply divisory.

 

[Aimee2006]

There are clues in the account name and the post count which suggest an eager newcomer on the one metre diving board, wanting to arrive with a splash.

Or, it's an advertorial for someone on deviantart...

Fair comments*, although it could be that I am just a newcomer with a right to an opinion rather than spamming.

* I nod to your justified cynicism.

 

[Aimee2006]

Before I go and pick up the kids, in the terms of AI and the visual arts, Literotica are making the same arguments against it as oil painters made when Niépce invented the camera.

 

[ElectricBlue]

Before I go and pick up the kids, in the terms of AI and the visual arts, Literotica are making the same arguments against it as oil painters made when Niépce invented the camera.

The difference is, the camera didn't scrape artists' original work to be trained on. That's one of the issues behind Lit's current policy towards AI, both visual and text - the intellectual property issues that sit behind the current AI models that scrape original works with no attribution and no payment, for AI training.

It might be a good idea to browse through the FAQs as well as threads over the last year or two in the Artists' Corner, and bring yourself up to speed with why the site is doing what it's doing with regard to visual AI.

As for text AI, there are dozens of threads here in the AH over the last year or so. It's a debate that's done its hundred yard dash, and it's pretty much on repeat. This thread is a bit of a straggler, compared to six months ago.

TLDR: the site doesn't want AI content at this point in time, and has current policies about it. Some people don't like the policies, but if you want to publish here, they're part of the terms of service.

 

[MillieDynamite]

If a true artist uses AI to create or springboard from their creation, I'd imagine they could produce some very specky* art. A writer who learns how to get the most out of AI could use to create great scenes that they then edit into something **mazing to read. But an artist or writer who's creative isn't going to use AI for all the hard work. He'll do that part. They'll change it from what is into something better. I get sometimes we, I, write like AI on certain sentences or parts. But with good editing, I change that when I take the time to do so. It isn't my editor's job to fix the AI like shit. It's mine.


*spectacular

**amazing

Edit, I wonder if you do graphic novels with AI and make them work? Just curious.

 

[Britva415]

You really do not understand the realities of life and business or are you are just being argumentative?

I was asking you to fill in the blanks. You seemed to have ideas in mind which weren't communicated, and so I literally couldn't understand what you were trying to say. It actually sounded like what I said I thought it sounded like, but I wasn't convinced that that was what you meant, so, if it's argumentative to invite you to clarify, then...

 

[Bramblethorn]

The case for illustrations in literature is that people do not buy Conan the Barbarian books to look at Frank Frazetta's interpretation of 'beauty' as a 30-something post natal gymnasium and fitness centre phobic hag, they buy them for stories in the written word where the illustrations serve to focus the reader on the time line and fictional setting.
From a writers point of view, and my Ukrainian friends hates me for this, how is cheap Ai that does a better job than old Frankie, in anyway cheating, especially if hours on expensive art apps is required to transform AI's interpretation of something into a more realistic vista?

If you're submitting work to a venue that says "no AI", and pretending it's not AI-generated, it should be obvious how that's "cheating".

As for "better job than old Frankie", here is an AI's (StableDiffusion) attempt at "in the style of Frazetta": https://civitai.com/images/1498055

The picture includes some kind of lizard. SD likes the lizard-skin texture so much that it tried to use it for the trees too:



We all know genAI struggles with human hands, but can it draw lizard claws?



There's a girl in it. She should probably be seeing a doctor about whatever the deal is with her elbow. And the hand-blob. And what is the shapeless mass of lizard-and-human-flesh texture she's holding? And wtf is going on with the shadow under her elbow?



AI can't draw fingers, but maybe it can draw toes? Or at least feet?...ugh, no.



And the "rock" she's perched on is some fucked-up mix of lizard-skin and her-skin:


The tiara-thing in her hair is quarter-assed at best:



That picture has "100% positive" reviews, which suggests that by genAI standards it's pretty good, and also tells us that people's standards for AI "art" are very very low.

Frazetta isn't one of my favourite artists but he knew how to draw without the kind of garbage shown above.

There are cases for and against AI but a form of apartheid keeping less well-off artists from affordable artwork is simply divisory.

Kinda gross to compare this to apartheid. Maybe go read about what apartheid actually was (and in some places still is) before trivialising it by comparing it to the travails of an author who doesn't want to pay for good cover art.

 

[Aimee2006]

Kinda gross to compare this to apartheid. Maybe go read about what apartheid actually was (and in some places still is) before trivialising it by comparing it to the travails of an author who doesn't want to pay for good cover art.

I was born in Northern Ireland, I lived with apartheid so attempting to shame me in something I am far more knowledgable about than yourself is both conceited and sanctimonious, don't you think? as indeed is your demonising authors living from paycheck to paycheck as merely not wanting to put their hands in their pockets. You may as well just tell them to eat cake.