And I think this is dead on and it goes for programming as well. Right now there are a lot of programs that are going out from people who don’t know how to program and don’t know security rules and their applications are crashing. For writing this is it right here. If you don’t know what you’re doing, and you have the tools to do it fast you’re going to crash.
This goes for the table top gaming community as well. Someone who's been GMing (Gamemastering/Leading) games for years but suddenly uses AI to finish a sentence? Cancelled. The young GM that used AI to help build a world? Cancelled. The gamer that used AI to generate images of her characters instead of going to get a commission from an "actual artist?" Also cancelled. Never mind that she only did that to save the artist time and resources, to share a vision. Alongside the QR codes for "how to take a shower" at cons the past couple of years? Signs that say "AI not welcome here." Disclosures for Artist Alley that you WILL be tossed out and blacklisted for AI usage. I can't even with this nonsense anymore.
Six months ago I would have pushed back, but no, there's now a significant and identifiable angry crowd that really is afraid of the method. They have posted so often and at such length that I can only defend the AI critics who distance themselves from the hysteria.
yep. Agree 100% with you. So frustrating! And it paralyzes a process that might otherwise lead to nuanced clarity, to recognized best-practices, to several distinct opposing schools of thought that disagree and debate without demonizing one another.
Instead, we just have paralysis. Only in the courts could we make progress right now, I'm afraid.
At least our attorneys have folks like Steph to submit amicus briefs like this one!
I stand right there with you when you say: "Here’s my spicy take, and I stand by it completely: using AI without craft knowledge actually makes your job harder, not easier."
Early on...back before ChatGPT was even a thing,.. I began experimenting with generative AI. I quickly found that lacking the foundational knowledge and skills for creating art was a real handicap when using AI.
In my particular case, although I love music, I have absolutely no knowledge or skills around music theory, musical structures, the process of music composition, etc. There were AI music generators (which have gotten much more sophisticated over the past couple of years) that could generate music-like sound, but I had (and continue to have) absolutely no clue as to whether the sound generated is genuinely good music or just a mediocre assembly of notes.
My expertize is the written word and visual art...both areas I have spent decades learning and practicing. As you note, with a solid foundation of knowledge and skills, you begin to feel in your gut if something is working or not.
It makes me cring when I see writers using AI as a substitute for developing their knowledge and skills. It makes me wonder about the quality of their writing. How can they assess their writing if they don't have the fundamentals down?
The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where individuals with limited knowledge or competence in a domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence. Proposed by psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger in 1999, it stems from an inability to recognize one's own incompetence.
This applies to the use of AI tools for creative work. If you don't know what is great, good, mediocre, or just plain aweful, your limited knowledge and skills will lead you to overestimate the quality of the writing your generated with an AI tool.
For those who don't have the foundational skills, I encourage you to use AI to help you develop them. It can be an incredibly powerful tool in making you a better writer. Use it!
Exactly correct, and we've been saying this for years. Without a knowledge base regarding the outcome you want to achieve, using AI won't give you optimal results. We've also seen that even being skilled, if you neglect to put in the extra effort, you will need volume to make up for leaving that step out. The more effort, the less volume is needed.
I know for a fact that some mid-six-figure to seven-figure authors are using AI to generate large portions of their prose and massaging it on the edit pass. It has made no difference in sales. Knowing they use it, I can see the occasional un-edited passage that creeps in, but it has no impact on the whole. Readers don't see it because the majority of the prose reads as they've always written.
I believe the way forward needs to not only teach prompting but also add in references to craft in the introductory courses the leaders have out. What Steph wrote here should also be part of Writing with AI 101 for the new folks who have a story idea and want to get it out. As many have said here, there's plenty of instruction on how to use AI. What I haven't seen is craft instruction tied into that.
It sure would make the rabid minority gnash and snarl, but it is desperately needed. As a writing coach I want to contribute to this "writing instruction using AI tools but focusing on writing craft while using them", but I have too many other things on my plate right now. Also, the ideas I do have need more time to percolate before I have anything groundbreaking to contribute (if ever).
Hey, everyone else, don't wait for me. Plunge in! ;-)
I agree fully with all of this. I've written over 100 books in an 18+ year career and learning AI has made me a better writer, because I've had to think of craft differently, dissect it, and explore it from different angles. It's not a cheat code for me; it's a level up.
Yes! Right? And authors accusing other authors of ‘slop’ are completely dehumanizing the author experience. But I got in trouble for saying that yesterday publicly. I put so much thought and work into my AI drafts, it’s insulting to suggest otherwise because of the tool I use.
AI tools produce consistent output only when the process enforces it. Without governance- like a review step for every piece- quality drifts. Details shift slightly each time, and what looks fine in isolation turns into noticeable slop across a book or series.
"“Slop” has stopped being a quality descriptor and started being a tribal marker. It no longer means “this is bad.” It means “this person used a tool I don’t approve of.” And, y’all, that’s gatekeeping. Plain and simple." -- what's interesting is the people who yell SLOP or DON'T LET AI DO YOUR THINKING FOR YOU are literally doing that when they call anything AI-adjacent "slop". their emotions have overtaken logic.
I know, right? Whenever I read or hear someone using the word in an accusatory sense, I feel my blood pressure rise. It’s nothing more than a shorthand for lazy tribalism.
LOL The biggest slop was in the early days of the internet. That was true slop, of which in the day we all called "crap."
Personally, as a three time stroke survivor, I love AI. It helps me sort my thoughts on my bad days.
If I have something I want to write, but my brain is off, Chat will interview me on the subject, then take my muddled mess and write a draft from all I said. Then, I rewrite what he wrote later. Teamwork! 😁
Agree 100%. I wrote an article about "slop" last year and I wish it had been as eloquent as yours is. I tried to make the same general points, though:
1. Slop has been around forever.
Literary authors in 1930-1970 derided all pulp fiction and would have used "slop" to describe it if they had had that term... and for much of the pulp published during that time, they weren't wrong. But some pulp fiction authors made it an art form.
When print-on-demand became a thing, the tradpub world derided "self-published" books and would have called them "slop" if the term had been in common usage... and for much of the selfpub crap on CreateSpace etc., they weren't wrong. But some indie authors proved they could create books as good and beautiful as anything traditionally published.
Now that AI has become a thing... you get the picture. (You drew the picture vividly here!)
2. AI tools are only as good as the person using them. Despite the way they are hyped, they really are only tools, and even after they reach impressive levels of sophistication, they are only as good as the one who uses them.
Thank you for helping restore genuine, helpful significance to the word "slop," because it needs to be an important part of our ongoing conversation in the publishing world. And like every word, it needs to be accurately understood and correctly used.
And I think this is dead on and it goes for programming as well. Right now there are a lot of programs that are going out from people who don’t know how to program and don’t know security rules and their applications are crashing. For writing this is it right here. If you don’t know what you’re doing, and you have the tools to do it fast you’re going to crash.
This goes for the table top gaming community as well. Someone who's been GMing (Gamemastering/Leading) games for years but suddenly uses AI to finish a sentence? Cancelled. The young GM that used AI to help build a world? Cancelled. The gamer that used AI to generate images of her characters instead of going to get a commission from an "actual artist?" Also cancelled. Never mind that she only did that to save the artist time and resources, to share a vision. Alongside the QR codes for "how to take a shower" at cons the past couple of years? Signs that say "AI not welcome here." Disclosures for Artist Alley that you WILL be tossed out and blacklisted for AI usage. I can't even with this nonsense anymore.
This: are they actually evaluating the quality? Or are they just mad about the method? That's the heart of the whole controversy.
They are afraid of the method and become angry because of their fear.
Six months ago I would have pushed back, but no, there's now a significant and identifiable angry crowd that really is afraid of the method. They have posted so often and at such length that I can only defend the AI critics who distance themselves from the hysteria.
The problem with that crowd is that it makes it impossible to talk about the legitimate concerns about AI and work toward real solutions.
yep. Agree 100% with you. So frustrating! And it paralyzes a process that might otherwise lead to nuanced clarity, to recognized best-practices, to several distinct opposing schools of thought that disagree and debate without demonizing one another.
Instead, we just have paralysis. Only in the courts could we make progress right now, I'm afraid.
At least our attorneys have folks like Steph to submit amicus briefs like this one!
They're afraid of everything about it. It's like mass hysteria if you even mention AI.
I stand right there with you when you say: "Here’s my spicy take, and I stand by it completely: using AI without craft knowledge actually makes your job harder, not easier."
Early on...back before ChatGPT was even a thing,.. I began experimenting with generative AI. I quickly found that lacking the foundational knowledge and skills for creating art was a real handicap when using AI.
In my particular case, although I love music, I have absolutely no knowledge or skills around music theory, musical structures, the process of music composition, etc. There were AI music generators (which have gotten much more sophisticated over the past couple of years) that could generate music-like sound, but I had (and continue to have) absolutely no clue as to whether the sound generated is genuinely good music or just a mediocre assembly of notes.
My expertize is the written word and visual art...both areas I have spent decades learning and practicing. As you note, with a solid foundation of knowledge and skills, you begin to feel in your gut if something is working or not.
It makes me cring when I see writers using AI as a substitute for developing their knowledge and skills. It makes me wonder about the quality of their writing. How can they assess their writing if they don't have the fundamentals down?
The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias where individuals with limited knowledge or competence in a domain greatly overestimate their own knowledge or competence. Proposed by psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger in 1999, it stems from an inability to recognize one's own incompetence.
This applies to the use of AI tools for creative work. If you don't know what is great, good, mediocre, or just plain aweful, your limited knowledge and skills will lead you to overestimate the quality of the writing your generated with an AI tool.
For those who don't have the foundational skills, I encourage you to use AI to help you develop them. It can be an incredibly powerful tool in making you a better writer. Use it!
Exactly correct, and we've been saying this for years. Without a knowledge base regarding the outcome you want to achieve, using AI won't give you optimal results. We've also seen that even being skilled, if you neglect to put in the extra effort, you will need volume to make up for leaving that step out. The more effort, the less volume is needed.
I know for a fact that some mid-six-figure to seven-figure authors are using AI to generate large portions of their prose and massaging it on the edit pass. It has made no difference in sales. Knowing they use it, I can see the occasional un-edited passage that creeps in, but it has no impact on the whole. Readers don't see it because the majority of the prose reads as they've always written.
I believe the way forward needs to not only teach prompting but also add in references to craft in the introductory courses the leaders have out. What Steph wrote here should also be part of Writing with AI 101 for the new folks who have a story idea and want to get it out. As many have said here, there's plenty of instruction on how to use AI. What I haven't seen is craft instruction tied into that.
Imagine how that would torque the rabid minority?
It sure would make the rabid minority gnash and snarl, but it is desperately needed. As a writing coach I want to contribute to this "writing instruction using AI tools but focusing on writing craft while using them", but I have too many other things on my plate right now. Also, the ideas I do have need more time to percolate before I have anything groundbreaking to contribute (if ever).
Hey, everyone else, don't wait for me. Plunge in! ;-)
I agree fully with all of this. I've written over 100 books in an 18+ year career and learning AI has made me a better writer, because I've had to think of craft differently, dissect it, and explore it from different angles. It's not a cheat code for me; it's a level up.
Yes! Right? And authors accusing other authors of ‘slop’ are completely dehumanizing the author experience. But I got in trouble for saying that yesterday publicly. I put so much thought and work into my AI drafts, it’s insulting to suggest otherwise because of the tool I use.
AI tools produce consistent output only when the process enforces it. Without governance- like a review step for every piece- quality drifts. Details shift slightly each time, and what looks fine in isolation turns into noticeable slop across a book or series.
"“Slop” has stopped being a quality descriptor and started being a tribal marker. It no longer means “this is bad.” It means “this person used a tool I don’t approve of.” And, y’all, that’s gatekeeping. Plain and simple." -- what's interesting is the people who yell SLOP or DON'T LET AI DO YOUR THINKING FOR YOU are literally doing that when they call anything AI-adjacent "slop". their emotions have overtaken logic.
I think the big difference is: Letting AI write, and writing with AI.
AI will always give an average output because it has learned to adjust for the center.
A writer's voice (and here I mean writer in the craft sense) is situated outside the center.
AI can do that, but not without a 'real' writer on the wheel.
Good summary.
nothing makes me angrier than the word slop. It’s gaslighting, plain and simple.
I know, right? Whenever I read or hear someone using the word in an accusatory sense, I feel my blood pressure rise. It’s nothing more than a shorthand for lazy tribalism.
LOL The biggest slop was in the early days of the internet. That was true slop, of which in the day we all called "crap."
Personally, as a three time stroke survivor, I love AI. It helps me sort my thoughts on my bad days.
If I have something I want to write, but my brain is off, Chat will interview me on the subject, then take my muddled mess and write a draft from all I said. Then, I rewrite what he wrote later. Teamwork! 😁
Agree 100%. I wrote an article about "slop" last year and I wish it had been as eloquent as yours is. I tried to make the same general points, though:
1. Slop has been around forever.
Literary authors in 1930-1970 derided all pulp fiction and would have used "slop" to describe it if they had had that term... and for much of the pulp published during that time, they weren't wrong. But some pulp fiction authors made it an art form.
When print-on-demand became a thing, the tradpub world derided "self-published" books and would have called them "slop" if the term had been in common usage... and for much of the selfpub crap on CreateSpace etc., they weren't wrong. But some indie authors proved they could create books as good and beautiful as anything traditionally published.
Now that AI has become a thing... you get the picture. (You drew the picture vividly here!)
2. AI tools are only as good as the person using them. Despite the way they are hyped, they really are only tools, and even after they reach impressive levels of sophistication, they are only as good as the one who uses them.
Thank you for helping restore genuine, helpful significance to the word "slop," because it needs to be an important part of our ongoing conversation in the publishing world. And like every word, it needs to be accurately understood and correctly used.
(...sez the editor!) ;-)