ChatGPTlön, or Prompts towards a Supreme Fiction | In Media Res (original) (raw)

Surveying narrative applications of artificial intelligence in film, games and interactive fiction, this article imagines the future of artificial intelligence (AI) authorship and explores trends that seek to replace human authors with algorithmically generated narrative. While experimental works that draw on text generation and natural language processing have a rich history, this article focuses on commercial applications of AI narrative and looks to future applications of this technology. Video games have incorporated AI and procedural generation for many years, but more recently, new applications of this technology have emerged in other media. Director Oscar Sharp and artist Ross Goodwin, for example, generated significant media buzz about two short films that they produced which were written by their AI screenwriter. It’s No Game (2017), in particular, offers an apt commentary on the possibility of replacing striking screenwriters with AI authors. Increasingly, AI agents and vi...

This Interim Report refers to Task3.2. of Work Package 3–"Authors and Performers". This Task is titled"The Growing Role of AI machines as Producers of Literary and Artistic Works: Challenges to Human Authorship". As we describe below, in light of the evolution of policy in scholarship in this field we have adjusted the focus of the task to better reflect these developments and provide an original contribution to this emerging debate. The aim of the Interim Report is to briefly describe the outline and structure of the final reportD3.5 Final report on the impact of IA authorship expected to be released on M21. From a substantive perspective, it maps out at a high level the state of our work thus far and our main avenues of research going forward, including empirical research through interviews.The Interim Report serves to obtain internal peer-reviewers' input on the: •study scope, and in particular topics excluded from our analysis; •study structure, its clari...

Consider this scenario: you discover that an artwork you greatly admire, or a captivating novel that deeply moved you, is in fact the product of artificial intelligence, not a human's work. Would your aesthetic judgment shift? Would you perceive the work differently? If so, why? The advent of artificial intelligence (AI) in the realm of art has sparked numerous philosophical questions related to the authorship and artistic intent behind AI-generated works. This paper explores the debate between viewing AI as a tool employed by human artists and perceiving AI as a new form of artistic expression with minimal human involvement. While we often seek a human mind behind certain artwork, we may still appreciate and engage with works that lack this element but have aesthetic value nonetheless. The paper also considers the traditional concept of "implied author", suggesting that readers or artwork viewers might construct an authorial presence from the work itself, regardless of its actual origin. It will be finally suggested how AI-generated art might change our perceptions of human authorship itself.

In this paper, I investigate how generative AI affects our thinking abilities. Drawing on Hannah Arendt’s notion of thinking as a “soundless dialogue between me and myself, the two-in-one,” I use Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein as an example of what happens when a knowledgeable person fails to engage in thinking. I show how Victor Frankenstein's scientific endeavor leads to catastrophic consequences because he does not discuss his ideas with peers and lacks solitude, both necessary conditions for thinking and moral considerations. I then ask where thinking occurs in contemporary society, where overstimulation, distraction, and a lack of solitude are widespread. I question how we can heed Clerval's advice to "compose ourselves" in a world of technological distractions that draw us further away from ourselves. I suggest that the humanities, especially the study of literature, can help cultivate the "internal dialogue" required for decision-making, planning, and moral considerations. Finally, I consider the implications of relinquishing the structuring of our cognitive language abilities to artificial agents such as ChatGPT and suggest shifting the focus of literary studies to thinking.

The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) machines using deep learning neural networks to create material that facially looks like it should be protected by copyright is growing exponentially. From articles in national news media to music, film, poetry and painting, AI machines create material that has economic value and that competes with productions of human authors. The Article reviews both normative and doctrinal arguments for and against the protection by copyright of literary and artistic productions made by AI machines. The Article finds that the arguments in favor of protection are flawed and unconvincing and that a proper analysis of the history, purpose, and major doctrines of copyright law all lead to the conclusion that productions that do not result from human creative choices belong to the public domain. The Article proposes a test to determine which productions should be protected, including in case of collaboration between human and machine. Finally, the Article applies the proposed test to three specific fact patterns to illustrate its application.

Purpose: Bothorship-"bot authorship", or the use of artificial intelligence tools to support writing activitieshas transformed publishing in the few years since the emergence of ChatGPT in late 2022. The bane of the publisher's existence, but a boon for writers, these tools support enhanced writing quality and reduce the amount of time and effort needed to turn research findings into an acceptable manuscript. This paper discusses some of the key aspects of Bothorship as they have emerged in the past two years. Design: This paper explores recent publications and discourse surrounding AI contributions to scholarly publications. Findings: While there are substantial downsides to AI use in scholarly communications, there are also tremendous benefits. Bothorship can level the playing field for non-native English speakers having to navigate an arena (scholarly publishing) where English is the lingua franca. Originality/Value: This paper discusses key issues related to bothorship and AI contributions to publications. It reviews and presents a perspective on the future of AI authorship and copyediting for manuscripts.