One thing AI should be good at is reading, so why is it being used instead for writing? It's hard enough for writers to earn a living without having to compete with poseurs and other talentless hacks who need AI to help them. Jane Austen never used AI. Neither did Dickens, Tolstoy, Tartt, Atwood, Morrison or Madeline Miller. I'd say that if you need AI to help you write, then maybe writing really isn't your thing and you need to try a new bag...? (*・_・)ノ⌒*
But AI should be good at reading, where it could serve a useful purpose promoting author's works. One thing desperately needed for any book to succeed is a search engine that can accurately offer relevant suggestions to the question: what book should I read next if I loved this book?
AI ought to be able to see the similarities between books after reading millions of them by now, so it shouldn't be such a difficult question to answer for properly programmed software. Just what do this book, this book and this book have in common? Why is that book over there different?
Some of the crappiest books have huge readerships; there's a reader tribe for every book, if only the readers can find it. So why isn't AI being programmed to do this instead of stealing writing jobs? ¯\_(ﭢ)_/¯
But AI should be good at reading, where it could serve a useful purpose promoting author's works. One thing desperately needed for any book to succeed is a search engine that can accurately offer relevant suggestions to the question: what book should I read next if I loved this book?
AI ought to be able to see the similarities between books after reading millions of them by now, so it shouldn't be such a difficult question to answer for properly programmed software. Just what do this book, this book and this book have in common? Why is that book over there different?
Some of the crappiest books have huge readerships; there's a reader tribe for every book, if only the readers can find it. So why isn't AI being programmed to do this instead of stealing writing jobs? ¯\_(ﭢ)_/¯
Tags: