I am not talking about Ai generated content i am talking about  AI-Assisted Content - The author has used an AI tool for editing or proofreading. The story thus reflects the author’s creativity and structure, but it may use the AI’s voice and tone. There may be some negligible amount of snippets generated by AI.

I have read some books that are AI assisted  and those were not so bad. But if it is Ai generated i have to agree that those Ai generated slop is worst as hell.

If not for the Ai taking care about the editing side i might have taken one or two days just to write one chapter. and not all people is good with gremmer or have the money to hire a editor so ai become the only option for new writers. at the end i would like to request to not skip the story just becouse it is Ai- Assisted. read it first and atlest 4 to 5 chapter and ask your self if the story was good. 

TreeWithoutRoots Wrote: but it may use the AI’s voice and tone

This part is critical. For me a work lives or dies by the voice and tone, what's the point getting bored by the AI one? If you're just using it for grammar, it shouldn't mess with you voice/tone anyway unless you blindly copy-paste stuff – and if you do put that little care into your work, why should a reader?

TreeWithoutRoots Wrote: If not for the Ai taking care about the editing side i might have taken one or two days just to write one chapter.

Seems still crazy fast tbh. Don't think I ever wrote a chapter in less than two days.

TreeWithoutRoots Wrote: read it first and atlest 4 to 5 chapter and ask your self if the story was good.

If the voice doesn't pop on the first page, it most likely isn't.

ayebcee Wrote: This part is critical. For me a work lives or dies by the voice and tone, what's the point getting bored by the AI one? If you're just using it for grammar, it shouldn't mess with you voice/tone anyway unless you blindly copy-paste stuff – and if you do put that little care into your work, why should a reader?

This, actually I was doing a terrible mistake by blindly copy-paste it, and now I had to fix everything back and only used them for grammar check, ignore most of the rewritten prose and such, and it does looks a lot better.

AI is a touchy subject here, so you'll get a wide variety of opinions. 

In my referrers, when I get searches that filter out the AI tags, they always filter both. I get plenty of others that don't filter either. 

I'm of the opinion that the people who care won't tolerate either, and the people who don't, don't care at all. I also think most readers are just looking for a good, entertaining read. If you can provide that, they'll read, no matter what.

I agree with what ayebcee said. The point of writing is to have your voice and tone on the page. If you're using AI or a tool to check for grammar, and not just blindly following it, that's one thing. But if you're just taking whatever it spits out, there's a high possibility of it getting it wrong. 

Not exactly the same thing, but I'm using Google Docs for a story I'm working on (which will soon be ready for posting once I get a cover for it   ). There have been so many times that it has suggested an edit that was either flat out wrong or completely changes the tone I'm going for. Relatively minor, really, but not what I what. For example, in one of the last scenes I've finished, I wrote the following dialogue:

“So, if he got me sick, I could be in there with him?”

Google Docs wants to change it to:

"So, if he got me sick, could I be there with him?"

Denotation, pretty much the same. They get to the same overall meaning: sick = get to be in there. To me, though, there is a subtle difference in how each flows and how the character talks, plus the actual meaning. The first, to me, is trying to confirm something the character knows, or, in the broader context of the scene, trying to be sneaky. The second is as if they don't know and are asking for permission. I haven't tried editing with AI tools, but I'm not sure they're at the point where they would be able to catch the difference. So, it's up to the writer to make those decisions rather than relying on AI to hopefully do so.

Apologies for my rambling, that was a lot more than I was expecting to type.

H Behevras Wrote: This, actually I was doing a terrible mistake by blindly copy-paste it, and now I had to fix everything back and only used them for grammar check, ignore most of the rewritten prose and such, and it does looks a lot better.

You can also instruct it just to point potential issues, seems a lot easier and cleaner to go through than a whole ass rewrite. Say, for me it does stuff like this:

• "On it" vs. "In on it"
  
  • Original: “It’s not a joke if only one person on earth is on it.”
  • Correction: The common English idiom is to be "in on" a joke [1.144]. Change to: “It’s not a joke if only one person on earth is in on it.”

H Behevras Wrote: This, actually I was doing a terrible mistake by blindly copy-paste it,

Oh absolutely.

All of the 'suggestions' are crap in my experience. I briefly tried grammarly and deleted it more than a year ago. It wants to replace words with their more commonly used similar sounding words. Odious and odiferous are not synonyms. Delegated and designated mean different things. Sheesh.

AI lies to you, constantly. Don't trust it.

Using it like a spellchecker, or grammar checker: Totally fine.

Rewriting passages it says are wrong or confusing: Also fine, but don't let it take away your voice. Especially conversations between characters.

Letting it rephrase your writing and use the AI's voice....this is where you start to have a crap story that sounds like all other ai stories. 

The more you use ai, the worse it gets.

MistOverSnow Wrote: AI lies to you, constantly. Don't trust it.

Yeah, even with the same AI, whenever I check the grammar, it somehow gave different answers. Like one said it should be past tense, the other said past continuous tense. I don't know the difference and didn't know which I should use.

H Behevras Wrote: Yeah, even with the same AI, whenever I check the grammar, it somehow gave different answers. Like one said it should be past tense, the other said past continuous tense. I don't know the difference and didn't know which I should use.

Honestly? Read a grammar primer. There are quite a few, like The Chicago Manual of Style, or Strunk and White's Elements of Style, or the more entertaining Eats, Shoots and Leaves. 

You don't need to study it like you've got a test on Monday, just read it. You'll absorb some things from it that will improve your writing immediately. After some months or a year, read it again, and you'll learn more. 

Then you won't need to worry about AI flattening your voice or stealing your meaning.

H Behevras Wrote: Yeah, even with the same AI, whenever I check the grammar, it somehow gave different answers. Like one said it should be past tense, the other said past continuous tense. I don't know the difference and didn't know which I should use.

I'm afraid, this exactly shows how AI technology has evolved. If it were a simple grammar machine from the past, it would only give one answer. 
But reality is complex. I mean different tenses are used for their own reasons, sometimes not as a matter of right or wrong. As an AI user, one shouldn't just look at the final answer the AI gives. The user should also ask it to present its reasoning alongside, and then see which reasoning fits the context of the sentence. (Bah, sometimes the reasons AI gives neither fit I should say)

Saltius Wrote:

H Behevras Wrote: Yeah, even with the same AI, whenever I check the grammar, it somehow gave different answers. Like one said it should be past tense, the other said past continuous tense. I don't know the difference and didn't know which I should use.

I'm afraid, this exactly shows how AI technology has evolved. If it were a simple grammar machine from the past, it would only give one answer. 
But reality is complex. I mean different tenses are used for their own reasons, sometimes not as a matter of right or wrong. As an AI user, one shouldn't just look at the final answer the AI gives. The user should also ask it to present its reasoning alongside, and then see which reasoning fits the context of the sentence. (Bah, sometimes the reasons AI gives neither fit I should say)

Feels just giving it more context can help too, whether it sees a page or just a paragraph makes a big difference. I think. I still have no clue about tenses 🫢

MistOverSnow Wrote: AI is a touchy subject here, so you'll get a wide variety of opinions.

Truer words have never been said.

MistOverSnow Wrote: All of the 'suggestions' are crap in my experience. I briefly tried grammarly and deleted it more than a year ago. It wants to replace words with their more commonly used similar sounding words. Odious and odiferous are not synonyms. Delegated and designated mean different things.

Grammarly is good for typos and punctuation, and sometimes it will highlight a problem I missed, but blindly taking all the advice is a bad move. I run everything I write for RR through the free version of Grammarly and it does not like it when I use 'like'. So often, it will suggest changing it to 'as if', even when like is better.

When I first started writing web novels I tried to remove ALL of the Grammarly highlighted issues (this was an earlier version before AI was added, there would be lots of yellow highlights). It resulted in fragmented sentences. It's easy to fix 'errors' if your sentences are all short.

Assuming you are only looking for basic grammar help, I can't imagine any of the AIs being better. At least with Grammarly it has rules, which I assume humans have created. With the AIs, they are copying how we write, that's going to include our grammar mistakes. Or, for those who use AI, has it got over this limitation?

I'll admit I'm making some assumptions here, so could be wrong.

E.M. Dash Wrote: With the AIs, they are copying how we write, that's going to include our grammar mistakes. Or, for those who use AI, has it got over this limitation?

It generally works a bit more complicated than that, since it's not just a data mix-mash but uses a lot curation too, like they intentionally use bad writing to teach it what not to do. BUT there is still the hallucination problem and it gets worse the fuller the context window gets (plus there are variables like time, since they switch to dumber models during peaks), so even in the best case scenario, it's risky to trust it 100%.

MistOverSnow Wrote: There are quite a few, like The Chicago Manual of Style, or Strunk and White's Elements of Style, or the more entertaining Eats, Shoots and Leaves.

For those wanting to maximize their learning, the Elements of Style is 87 pages long.  But there is a lot in those 87 pages, I have a dog-eared copy that has highlighting and bits of paper for bookmarks in it that a thumb through most days.

I use it to translate my texts from my native language into English, but sometimes (almost always) the AI ignores my instructions and changes how I write, leaving my paragraphs fragmented (as I call it). Sometimes changing words alters even the context of the scene, which ends up stressing me out quite a bit, since it takes up the time I spent writing just to edit sometimes.

TreeWithoutRoots Wrote: If not for the Ai taking care about the editing side i might have taken one or two days just to write one chapter

It usually takes me like three or four days to write a chapter. That's why I only publish one chapter a week.

TreeWithoutRoots Wrote: not all people is good with gremmer or have the money to hire a editor so ai become the only option for new writers

Ok, but are you improving your writing? Are you going through and asking why it suggests every change it suggests?
A lot of people who use AI just hit "accept all" and call it a day, not bothering to see what the AI has actually done. Their first chapter is going to be just as messy and amateurish as their last. At the end of the year, they will not have grown. I don't like that.

In your Chapter 4, you have 45 paragraphs that begin with "He". Taking away status things, I count 69 paragraphs.
I have to ask: did the AI do this? 
If so, delete that program immediately and find a new one, because it is completely ruining your book. It is horrible.
If not, if you personally started all 45 of those paragraphs with "he", then still delete the AI program because it isn't helping at all. What is it even doing? If it left that many repeats in there, it isn't assisting you in the least. It's garbage at helping.

My point in that is, you probably didn't notice that a solid 2/3 of your paragraphs begin with the same word. Because you aren't working at improving your writing. You're working on writing quickly. And if you keep on letting the AI "assist" you (using the word loosely because it clearly isn't helping), you will never improve. The last chapter of this book will have all the same problems as the first. You will gain nothing.
That's why I don't like AI-assisted writing.

H Behevras Wrote: Use you are Right you use AI you have to read your own chapter at least three times. even if you tell it just to fix the grammar and spelling mistake. AI has a nature to change your writing according to how it feels is ok. I spend more than half an hour editing the things AI haschanged

ayebcee Wrote: This part is critical. For me a work lives or dies by the voice and tone, what's the point getting bored by the AI one? If you're just using it for grammar, it shouldn't mess with you voice/tone anyway unless you blindly copy-paste stuff – and if you do put that little care into your work, why should a reader?

This, actually I was doing a terrible mistake by blindly copy-paste it, and now I had to fix everything back and only used them for grammar check, ignore most of the rewritten prose and such, and it does looks a lot better.

Acusiont Wrote: I agree with what ayebcee said. The point of writing is to have your voice and tone on the page. If you're using AI or a tool to check for grammar, and not just blindly following it, that's one thing. But if you're just taking whatever it spits out, there's a high possibility of it getting it wrong. 

Not exactly the same thing, but I'm using Google Docs for a story I'm working on (which will soon be ready for posting once I get a cover for it   ). There have been so many times that it has suggested an edit that was either flat out wrong or completely changes the tone I'm going for. Relatively minor, really, but not what I what. For example, in one of the last scenes I've finished, I wrote the following dialogue:

“So, if he got me sick, I could be in there with him?”

Google Docs wants to change it to:

"So, if he got me sick, could I be there with him?"

Denotation, pretty much the same. They get to the same overall meaning: sick = get to be in there. To me, though, there is a subtle difference in how each flows and how the character talks, plus the actual meaning. The first, to me, is trying to confirm something the character knows, or, in the broader context of the scene, trying to be sneaky. The second is as if they don't know and are asking for permission. I haven't tried editing with AI tools, but I'm not sure they're at the point where they would be able to catch the difference. So, it's up to the writer to make those decisions rather than relying on AI to hopefully do so.

Apologies for my rambling, that was a lot more than I was expecting to type.

I totally agree. we will when I ask AI to just speak grammar and spelling.changes some things and I have to edit them for hours. if I would have copy paste it what AI would spit out, forget about other reader me myself as author will be vomiting at the result.