Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
national

Japan literary laureate unashamed about using ChatGPT

27 Comments
By Tomohiro OSAKI

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2024 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

Shows the lack of intelligence of the writer writer and proud of it.

11 ( +19 / -8 )

"The price is right if the customer pays it," as my grandfather said. If readers are satisfied with bot-derived content, then that is that. But an acquaintance of mine was able to discern my identity from an anonymous comment on some Website, and when I marveled at how, he said, "I know your style."

Good reading is not just what is said, it is how it is said - and friggin' prove me wrong! (he ejaculated with sudden emotion).

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The use of AI in writing is a fascinating intersection of technology and creativity. It challenges traditional notions of talent and raises important questions about the evolving nature of authorship. Writing a book with the assistance of AI may require a different set of skills, such as programming and data interpretation, in addition to creative input. Whether one considers it talented or not depends on the criteria for evaluating literary merit. It opens up a broader conversation about the role of technology in the creative process and invites us to reevaluate our understanding of talent in the digital age.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

confiding her innermost thoughts that "I can never talk to anyone else about".

Oh my. Sounds exciting.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Shows the lack of intelligence of the writer writer and proud of it.

If that were the case works of the same quality would be already flooding the market since the tool is available to anybody. This is obviously not the case so the author still have some kind of "intelligence" (talent) in order to get something that is recognized as good from the terribly bad output of ChatGPT.

At the end it is just another tool, some people will abuse it and produce horrible things and others will just use it as a support to better take advantage of their own talent. It would be impossible to confirm if actually 5% of the novel was written with the help of AI, but it seems like a reasonable amount for someone that already can write and just take advantage of AI to avoid being repetitive, over detailed, etc. etc.

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

Set in a futuristic Tokyo, the book revolves around a high-rise prison tower and its architect's intolerance of criminals, with AI a recurring theme.

Sounds like Jeremy Bentham's Panopoticon, and timely.

As Picasso said great artists know how to steal from the best.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

When used properly, ChatGPT is a blessing. Authors like Grisham, Picoult and Martin, who make frivolous lawsuits should be boycotted and their works removed from bookshelves and online bookstores. Rie Kudan is a genius and is simply using technology available to anyone to assist her writing. If they had had PCs, surely Kerouac and Dickens would've used them to type, and perhaps use AI for assistance with writer's block. I use it for my music and writing, but not as well as Kudan because nobody buys my stuff. This just proves that she is using it for the betterment of literature, so please stop complaining about her and start praising her for putting it to good use.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Back before AI got good enough this was even a semi-feasible way to write (or draw), I freely use Google Translate's automatic translation to assist in the translating work I have to do for the company. Of course, it's not always ideal or even acceptable, but it can provide a starting point or propose alternatives, and every so often it can pop out something good enough I can just use it and move my attention to the next sentence. I'd assume she's using it in an equivalent manner and if so I can hardly object.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The use of AI in writing is a fascinating intersection of technology and creativity. It challenges traditional notions of talent and raises important questions about the evolving nature of authorship. Writing a book with the assistance of AI may require a different set of skills, such as programming and data interpretation, in addition to creative input. Whether one considers it talented or not depends on the criteria for evaluating literary merit. It opens up a broader conversation about the role of technology in the creative process and invites us to reevaluate our understanding of talent in the digital age.

This very much reads like something generated by AI.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Shows the lack of intelligence of the writer writer and proud of it.

Anyone with actual knowledge about the topic and critical thinking skills will know that it takes someone with intelligence to use ChatGPT in such a sophisticated way. You have to already possess the knowledge and skill.

Did Renaissance Artists Use Optical Projections, Or Didn't They?

https://www.photonics.com/Articles/Did_Renaissance_Artists_Use_Optical_Projections/a20189#:~:text=WASHINGTON%2C%20Oct.%208%20--%20Contemporary%20artist%20David%20Hockney,to%20project%20scenes%20onto%20their%20canvases%20for%20tracing.

Even Renaissance artists used projection technology with prisms mirrors and light to trace images.

There's one point on which all three men can agree: The use of optics by any artist does not constitute "cheating," or in any way lessen his or her artistic abilities. Such misconceptions "cloud the discussion," says Stork. The use of optical aids "diminishes no great artist," Hockney writes in his book, Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters (2001, Studio Books).

No one seems to be complaining or calling them unintelligent or unskilled.

The only difference now is ChatGPT is available to anyone regardless of race, gender, economic status, or religion; where as, those Renaissance artists were usually of a certain demographic which always expects to get a pass.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Anyone with actual knowledge about the topic and critical thinking skills will know that it takes someone with intelligence to use ChatGPT in such a sophisticated way. You have to already possess the knowledge and skill.

There is a real concern here about how long that will be the case though. After a couple more generations of development these generators are probably going to be good enough at spitting out novels that they’ll no longer need any human input at all like they do now to be convincing. Whatever skill set is involved in knowing how to crop ideas from current ChatGPT to put into works that are still mainly human generated is going to be pretty useless then.

Which raises the question of whether we really want artists to be using AI to create works of art at all, or if we want that to be something reserved for humans because its the human element that makes it art to us in the first place. This feels like a decision we should be making as a society now, and I’m heavily in favor of the latter.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

It's no different from having a personal assistant help with writing.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I can enjoy the writing without admiring the writer, who should be free to publish, but not win awards.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

her futuristic novel was penned by ChatGPT, saying generative AI had helped unlock her potential.

others celebrated her resourcefulness and the effort she put into experimenting with various prompts

Gee, I guess the next time someone cheats on their college essays or programming assignments, and they go on to get jobs that were denied to others that actually did their work, these cheaters are not at fault. It's just that "AI had helped unlock their potential"

And we should "celebrated their resourcefulness and the effort they put into experimenting with various prompts"

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

And they say cheaters never prosper don’t they, lol.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

The genii  has been released from the bottle. Even if an artist (of any kind) uses AI creatively there is still the question of using such things being ethical or not. But it's to late to ponder the issue. Other writers use (or will use) AI to "help" with the process of producing art. They might not let it be known that they do, since there is a skepticism that will always be there. But how are we to stop its use? We can't. AI has already gone too far and it will edge its way into virtually all aspects of life. There is no reining in its growth and sooner or later its use will be beyond what we want.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

'No use of GAI' should be a basic requirement for literary awards.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Did JT's A I miss "When used properly, ChatGPT is a blessing." Maybe the word G_d is the trigger. A I is a blessing, it created a computer script for my project.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kudan snagging a lit award with a 5% AI assist? Mind-blowing, right? This is pushing boundaries and sparking a real conversation on the soul of creativity. What's your take on it—absolute brilliance or maybe a tad controversial? People here are throwing around some passionate opinions, some praising the innovation, others raising an eyebrow. And, let's not forget the legal chaos with authors suing over AI rights—this is shaking up the literary world! Kudan is turning heads, but where do you stand on the whole AI-in-literature debate?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No use of GAI' should be a basic requirement for literary awards.

There is no realistic way for this requirement to be enforced, people can use the tool as the author in the article to improve the way they write without it being detectable (with enough specificity to avoid false accusations).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Marc Lowe

Authors like Grisham, Picoult and Martin, who make frivolous lawsuits should be boycotted and their works removed from bookshelves and online bookstores.

It's one thing to condone the use of AI in the creative process.

It's a completely different thing to start banning books of those who disagree with you. Although I agree that AI is a useful tool, I think you should reconsider your extremist proposition.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's no big deal. ChatGPT great tool to gather info, conduct research, etc. Do we want such talents wasting their time with searches, all the clickbait and $ agenda?

Smart, SEARCH is for DUMMIES = making Other's RICH, while Wasting YOUR time.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

They should be proud using an available technology to do what they want to do efficiently.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Shows the lack of intelligence of the writer writer [sic] and proud of it."

Writer writer...?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So Much for Human Intel.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites