Using ChatGPT to write spanking stories

As an author, my question about all this is WHY. Why does someone want to use AI to write spanking stories, as opposed to, say, writing them yourself? Is it because a would-be author wants to produce something without putting in the work? Is it because a reader wants to find stories to her/her liking without having to spend the time to look for one's by real authors (say, among the 30k+ stories already here on the LSF)? Is it just to prove that it can be done? Am I the only one who doesn't understand the (reason for the) question?

I asked ChatGPT to write me a story and it wrote one about the CEO of an multi-billion company which he had founded, being fired without warning, then asked to come back after a staff revolt, before deciding to join a rival company taking key staff with him. Do the stories not at least have to sound plausible?

A few different reasons come to my mind:

1. The first and most obvious one for me is that it speeds up the writing process. And not by a little bit, but by a massive amount. I'm a pretty slow writer, but for example writing 500-1000 words typically takes me one to two good hours. With AI 1k words usually takes me 15 minutes with only a minor decrease of quality, if that.

2. The second big reason is that AI can write for you the parts you don't particularly enjoy writing. So, for example one author might love to write about the plot, the characters and everything that lead to a spanking, but absolutely don't enjoy writing the spanking scene itself and that's when the AI can easily take over and do a very good job.

3. Third reason is related to 2# and is that AI is great to finish stories you've left unfinished because you were bored with it or because you wanted to start up a new project etc.

4. Fourth reason is that AI can sometimes give you inspiration about a scene a dialogue or anything really so it can actually improve the quality of your story. I'm personally using AI to write very fast, but I could totally see someone using AI to write at the same pace as usual, but with higher quality writing.

5. Five and final reason for today is simply because it's FUN! Wildly available large language models are something pretty new and a lot of people are having a lot of fun playing with them. Sadly, with most of them including ChatGPT which is the most famous one, the censorship is massive and makes it pretty much unusable for anything sex related including our common interest. But I'm sure we'll eventually have strong models that can be used to write erotica / spanking stories. Even as of right now, NovelAI already does a very good job at it though it has limitations.

You couldn't make it up, could you?

re Chatgpt, I sympathise with Rick Marlowe's viewpoint. Whilst speed-of-light mass production of spanking stories would soon fill to brimming the shelves of libraries such as this, would such AI-created stories - essentially a mash-up synthesis of hundreds of human writers' plots and styles - not inevitably be somewhat generic by nature? I've always seen anything 'artificial' as dodgy or second-rate. I value the idiosyncratic weirdness of my fellow-humans' single-minded spanking fictions. I'm dubious about the mash-up, though curious too.

America's fine free-spirit writer, Kurt Vonnegut, said with characteristic bluntness: “To practice any art, no matter how well or how badly, is a way to make your soul grow, for heaven’s sake. So do it.”

"Be creative! You'll feel better, we'll all feel better!" (a magazine cover that made me laugh once)

As with most tools, thesauri, dictionaries, and the like, there is a way to use them appropriately for the benefit of the task at hand. There is also ways of using them inappropriately, confounding thoughts and language and muddling ideas. I think the same is true of writing AI. If an author wants to run a piece through an AI generator to determine clarity, identify, plot holes, or correct grammatical and/or punctuation errors, these tools might be invaluable. If an author wants to tell a machine to write a story with specific parameters, the product produced often reflects a “move toward the mean”, a generic amalgamation of the AI’s learning. Personally, I feel like this produces a soulless and uninspired story. It retains none of the individuality of the author. It contains none of the quirkiness, cleverness, or uniqueness that makes an author a favorite. AI can re-create Michelangelo’s, David more precisely, and with more speed than the artist ever could, but devoid of any of the inspiration, toil or passion. How can an artist or an author be proud of that?

There are artists who try to copyright AI produced art. They always fail as only a human being can create something that can be copyrighted.

And it's not just AI produced work that cannot be copyrighted. For example, give a camera to a monkey and no one owns the resulting photos.

When it comes to stories, I'm curious what is considered AI produced though.

For example, if someone write a 10k word story entirely written by themself except for a 500 words scene that is produced by AI, does that mean the whole story can't be copyrighted or only the 500 words scene or since the majority of the story was written by a human, it's fine to copyright the whole story?

I'd also be curious to know how would one would go about making sure whether a story has been written using AI or not.

Hmmmm, if a ChatGPT story lands in a forest, and there's no one there to read it.........does it still suck?

Chat GPT writes based on what it has learned. And given our specific genre, from whom is it learning? Can AI discern a good source of information from a mediocre one? Due to the limitations of its programming won't it give equal weight to everything? And if it gives equal weight to everything, won't it tend towards or repeat what it encounters most? And if we all know that artistic mediocrity of all kinds far outweighs brilliance in volume, won't AI tend towards the mediocre because it is what it sees most? Does anyone here think that AI will encounter a story, see it as exceptional, learn from that genius, and the emulate it while eschewing all the volumes of stuff it sees more often? (Because that's not how it works.)

Well, the quality of a story written using AI depends entirely on the author skills (as well as the time and effort put into the story of course).

It's the author who is coming up with prompts (or initial storyline if using a tool like NovelAI) and most importantly it's the author who's deciding what to keep and what to discard from the AI output.

For example, if I'm writing say a 5k words story using AI, I'll get in total at the very least 25k words of generated output, but only pick up 20% of that output to write the story, the remaining 80% is discarded because not good enough or not coherent for the story.

In a nutshell: "garbage in, garbage out". If the author uses the tool poorly (or with low effort), the end result will be mediocre at best, but with good enough skill, it is already perfectly possible to produce a decent enough story using AI that should be indistinguishable from a regular story written entirely by a human (not comparing to professional writing here of course, just your average spanking story here on the library or on the Internet in general).

If someone gives an AI prompts and it spits something out, you can't copyright it.

If someone gives an AI prompts, it spits out something, and you then modify it - that's different. You are adding creative elements.

Here's a couple of examples that predate AI:

The telephone book. You can't copyright lists of facts, but telephone book is protected under copyright. How? The phone companies add human creatively by inventing fake names and assigning them fake phone numbers. That is enough to get a copyright.

Maps. You can't copyright facts, but maps are protected under copyright. How? The mapmakers insert errors. I've found a couple of them on paper maps, and recently I've found one on my car's GPS. To make it short, a friend built a house on a mountain. His house has a great view, low tax rate, and is hell to get if there's any snow on the ground. We're talking about that maybe 200 different people using that road over the course of a year. When I drive there, I got a couple of miles, then the road I'm traveling on diverts from the road on the GPS. I can't see that as an accident, so I'm sure it's a slight change so they can copyright the map.

So here's my view (which could be wrong):
IA generates an image and you use as a background draw on, you can copyright it.
IA writes a story and edit and rewrite some of it, you can copyright it.

But for the vast majority of AI produced things, it doesn't matter. No one is going launch a lawsuit. When they do, the person with the most money usually wins. Example: Richard Prince is an "artistic photographer" who is a master of "rephotography". He puts frames around other people's photos, takes photos of those framed photos, and sells as new art. He has won some lawsuits, lost others, but many lawsuits are settled because the people fighting to retain their ownership couldn't afford the court battles.