Censoring Stories: Incorrect Perception It is Generated by AI (Big Brother is Alive & Well)

[onehitwanda]

If Literotica created an AI Slop category and they started approving and funneling all AI generated/written/assisted stories to it, it would be the most bloated and least viewed category on the site.

Because.

The only way AI generated/written/assisted stories can do well is when the so called 'author' hides and/or lies about the fact that they're using AI. Why? Because the "Marketplace of Free Ideas" overwhelmingly rejects AI slop.

Maybe Literotica should just make them their AI slop category to reduce these types of threads. It could help, maybe. But I'm not sure.

In legal terms this is called a precedent.

It is not a precedent I would support setting in a site dedicated to the craft of humans writing stories about one of the most fundamental of human acts.

 

[onehitwanda]

So long as you use a water-based lube…

... so chocolate's out then?

*sad panda*

 

[stickygirl]

Why can't we have an eyeroll reaction emoji on the Like list?

 

[onehitwanda]

Why can't we have an eyeroll reaction emoji?

God, that would be amazing, wouldn't it?

Innocent whistle would also be amazing

 

[EmilyMiller]

... so chocolate's out then?

*sad panda*

Chocolate is an acceptable substitute for virtually anything

 

[stickygirl]

God, that would be amazing, wouldn't it?

Innocent whistle would also be amazing

The angry one is wasted because are we i) angry at the content or ii) angry at the poster?

 

[onehitwanda]

are we i) angry at the content or ii) angry at the poster?

Um... yes?

 

[IWroteThis]

Actually, if you read the official stuff put out by Literotica, they frame it, at least partially, as a question of copyright. It's an interesting question, actually.

Copyright exists at the moment an original work is created. So, if it was created by AI, does not that AI (or the organization owning said AI) automatically gain copyright of the creation? If it was a joint venture, with you writing part and AI writing part, do not you both hold the copyright together?

So, can you, as a person who didn't write the entire story, assert sufficient copyright ownership to allow Literotica to legally publish it? That seems to be the question Literotica is concerned with, and rightfully so.

 

[alohadave]

Yet another AI thread.

Copyright exists at the moment an original work is created. So, if it was created by AI, does not that AI (or the organization owning said AI) automatically gain copyright of the creation? If it was a joint venture, with you writing part and AI writing part, do not you both hold the copyright together?

In the US at least, for now, AI generated works don't qualify for copyright.

Whether or not modifying the output with your own work makes those parts copyrightable is unclear ATM.

It's still very much untested in court.

 

[onehitwanda]

Yet another AI thread.

We're out of rum, and absinthe, and I think @AwkwardMD got lost looking for a shop that still had any tequila for sale.

It's dire. We're contemplating moving on to Isopropyl alcohol and lemon jelly shooters.

 

[AwkwardMD]

We're out of rum, and absinthe, and I think @AwkwardMD got lost looking for a shop that still had any tequila for sale.

It's dire. We're contemplating moving on to Isopropyl alcohol and lemon jelly shooters.

 

[stickygirl]

We're out of rum, and absinthe, and I think @AwkwardMD got lost looking for a shop that still had any tequila for sale.

It's dire. We're contemplating moving on to Isopropyl alcohol and lemon jelly shooters.

You shouldn't drink isopropyl !! You're supposed to use it in an enema ( other flavours are available )

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

Yet another AI thread.

I call them AyeAye threads.

Aye, Aye, not another one!!!

 

[alohadave]

You shouldn't drink isopropyl !! You're supposed to use it in an enema ( other flavours are available )

Wouldn't that burn?

 

[stickygirl]

Wouldn't that burn?

Only if you light it
(never trust what you read on the interthing my child)

 

[Bramblethorn]

I agree with that. In fact I agree with most of the comments. My point is why not let the readers decide what is quality? Just like in the commercial world if readers don't like it they will not consume it.

Why do spam filters exist, when readers can just decide which emails they like?

 

[TheWritingGroup]

Why do spam filters exist, when readers can just decide which emails they like?

Why do gallery showings exist, when art lovers can just view every painting in the world and decide for themselves which ones they like?

 

[Britva415]

So, can you, as a person who didn't write the entire story, assert sufficient copyright ownership to allow Literotica to legally publish it? That seems to be the question Literotica is concerned with, and rightfully so.

"Concerned with" and reacting by washing their hands of it with a zero tolerance policy.

Rightfully so indeed, from the point of view of a party who never wants to be on the sharp end of infringement claims.

 

[SmilingLez]

Why do spam filters exist, when readers can just decide which emails they like?

Why do gallery showings exist, when art lovers can just view every painting in the world and decide for themselves which ones they like?

Now that scientists have discovered the answer to the question which came first, the chicken or the egg; now those two questions need to be answered

 

[ShelbyDawn57]

Now that scientists have discovered the answer to the question which came first, the chicken or the egg; now those two questions need to be answered

I'm still hung up on why the stupid bird crossed the road...

 

[SmilingLez]

I'm still hung up on why the stupid bird crossed the road...

You hit the nail on the head, stupidity has no bounds

 

[MelissaBaby]

I'm still hung up on why the stupid bird crossed the road...

...to screw in a light bulb.

 

[MadeleineSinha]

I'm still hung up on why the stupid bird crossed the road...

I dream of a time when chickens will be free to cross roads without their motives being questioned

 

[stickygirl]

I dream of a time when chickens will be free to cross roads without their motives being questioned

Nothing more dangerous than a motivated chicken

 

[BobbyBrandt]

Yet another rant on illogical censoring of stories because they were generated by AI.

I have had three stories rejected because the moderators have determined that these stories were written by AI, not a “real person”. From what I have read, their rational is that AI cannot have enough creativity to be of any value or interest to their readers. I was wondering if anyone could take the time to review my stories and tell me why with specific detail why they should not be published? Full disclosure, I am not a writer by trade. I do not have any formal training or education as a writer. I do this as a hobby. Growing up on a farm, books were my view into the world outside our rural community

First, I did not have AI write the stories for me. I did use AI to help me efficiently research details about the stories that would have taken much longer than if I had just done a “Google Search”.

This is a direct quote form the moderators:
Link: Does Literotica Have an AI (Artificial Intelligence) Publishing Policy? - Literotica.com
“One area of particular concern is software or apps that “rewrite” your paragraphs or stories for you. The text that results from rewriting features is definitely AI generated. These type of apps are replacing original human written text with generic AI generated text, and should be avoided when submitting work to Literotica. Readers prefer to experience your worlds and your fantasies in your own unique voice, rather than having them smoothed into a generic artificial voice available to everyone else using the same software”

So, they have taken it upon themselves to determine what readers prefer. How do they know that? Where is the data that supports that claim? A statement with no data is an opinion.

What is concerning and disturbing is that the moderators have anointed themselves the “Ministry of Truth” regarding censoring written works that they have decreed, with no objective evidence ,do not come from humans when in reality as in my case the story did come from a human. They have determined that they and they alone know what is best for the “masses”, that collection of uneducated and illiterate people that just do not have the capability to make their own judgments of what they (the readers) prefer.

I thought this group would be more enlightened but the moderators have chosen a path of censoring anything they do not believe in. It is not about what readers prefer. This is about the moderators wanting to control the free flow of ideas, thoughts and differing opinions. Any time anyone impose censoring “for the good of the people” then you know there is no validity to their claims.

That sounds a lot like Big Brother to me. They have no logic, no documented data to support their claims that “AI Bad”. Have we not learned from history when authoritarian regimes have no legitimate reason for subjecting the denizens of their domain they resort to “The Supreme Leader knows what is best for you”?

The moderators have lost sight of the purpose of the written word regardless of where or how it is generated. Is it not one of the primary purposes of free flow of ideas and information to be able to have open debates regarding those ideas and information? You can agree or disagree with someone’s opinion, but I don’t understand how censoring, doing a virtual book burning and blocking free flow of ideas is beneficial to anyone. The only beneficiaries are those trying to control free flow of ideas and information and in the end they will fail because there are enough of use out there that will never accept it

As a software engineer and CTO, I can tell you how AI works. The moderators are making decisions based on ignorance and fear. The Church from centuries ago decreed that the Earth is flat (not sure they actually made that claim specifically), the Sun revolves around the Earth, the Earth is the center of the Universe. Anyone that challenged that decree was summarily punished. Eventually, the Church had to acknowledge those decrees were not true. So much like the Church of those times, the moderators made a decree that they have been blessed with insight us mere mortals cannot comprehend resulting in the virtual burning of books that do not align with their philosophical principles.

So the Moderators can bury their head in the sand (let’s see how many bad metaphors I can use) or embrace the fact that AI used responsibly has a benefit including the art of writing.

I’ve got some news for you folks. The Earth is not flat, the Sun does not revolve around the Earth, the horseless carriage is not a fad, and AI is here to stay. So we have a choice to brand AI as “witchcraft” or we can embrace how to use it to benefit us all. I challenge the moderators to show us data to support their claims.

I won't beat the whole misconstrued censorship rant any more than it already has been. It simply is not a term that applies to the right of selection retained by the owners of this site. Why not let readers decide? Because not one of them is a legal stakeholder or holds any responsibility for what material the site presents to the public. For the same reason that the OP wouldn't just let anyone drive their vehicle under their liability insurance. It's a CYA situation. Period.

Thousands of stories get published on this site every month. Anyone who has a story returned for whatever reason needs to figure out why. Why were some of their stories approved but not others? There is no difference in the site rules or how they get applied, so any difference that does exists must reside in the stories that were sent back. Deny that all you want, but common sense and natural logic are not on your side.

Expecting the lone (as far as we know) administrator for the review of stories to serve as your personal editor to comb through, red-line and then tell you exactly where you need to make changes in your story is disrespectful to all the other writers clambering for her time and attention to get their properly written stories published. Whether generative AI was used or not is irrelevant. The fact remains that it was perceived as being used by whatever methods are employed, and that perception is what the OP needs to focus on. Sometimes a brief DM to Laurel is enough to change the perception. Sometimes it takes more effort, up to a complete rewrite of the story.