Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Books

The topic of artificial intelligence (AI) continues to be at the center of seemingly every conversation and news story. I, for one, read or listen to something about AI on a daily basis. From trying to find consciousness inside AI, to books being rejected because of undisclosed AI content, to legal cases where AI logs are being used to demonstrate that a person is liable for a crime, AI seems to be everywhere.

The latest cycle started last week while listening to the Life of Try podcast by Wynne Leon. Wynne invited brand strategist Nancy Martira. It was a great discussion about branding, how to promote yourself, and, of course, the subject of books came up. During the discussion, Nancy mentioned how AI-generated designs in book covers could affect an author’s credibility. In today’s world, that is probably true. A reader picks up a book and sees that the cover was produced by AI; the reader could then assume that the book was also written using AI. That’s not a far-fetched assumption, considering that I read an article in the Wall Street Journal yesterday titled “AI Has Plunged the Book Publishing Industry Into Utter Chaos.” The article discusses how a book agent pulled the plug on a multi-million-dollar book deal because they could not verify with certainty that the book was written by the author. It also mentioned that Hachette Book Group canceled Mia Ballard’s book Shy Girl, which was scheduled to be released in the United States, because there were rumors that AI was used to write the book.

Also, over the weekend, while visiting some friends, we were discussing court cases where lawyers were submitting legal documents created with AI that contained fake case citations. We also talked about privacy issues, where criminal defendants’ interactions with AI platforms are not protected by attorney-client privilege, and the content of those interactions was presented in cases as evidence against the defendants.

AI is here to stay, that’s for sure. The technological advances are way too great to ignore, from solving difficult mathematical problems to contributing to medical breakthroughs.

As with all technologies, it’s up to us to use this new tool wisely.

Returning to the subject of books, I think bad books, written by AI or not, will always exist. I have read my share of them over the years, long before AI came to fame. When I read a bad book, the author’s name goes on my blacklist, and I never read one of their books again. In my mind, there are too many good books out there and too little time to read them. So you read, assess, and move on to the next one.

I told another blogger friend not too long ago that I don’t mind reading an AI-created article. As a reader, I’m more interested in the information than in who wrote it. That doesn’t mean I’m going to read a book about how to perform brain surgery written by a person without the right credentials using AI. Even if you say, “You did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night!” like in the old commercials. Of course, I’m always going to check the sources regardless of who writes the article or book, so I don’t have a problem with AI. But I can understand the damage that books written solely by AI can cause. I’m thinking about market saturation and fewer opportunities for authors because not only do they need to compete in an already saturated market, but they also need to prove that their work is truly theirs. This will cause a lot of pain in both the short and long term.

While reading the Wall Street Journal article, I learned that the Authors Guild has created a certification called “Human Authored,” which “means that the text of the book was written by a human and not generated by AI, with the exception of minimal uses such as AI applications that check spelling and grammar or for research.”1 This comes with a cost of $10, or it is free if you are an Authors Guild member. The part about authors using AI to check grammar, spelling, or for research is definitely okay in my view. I think this is a good process to use before sending a manuscript to an editor.

I think this is where integrity comes into play. I understand that people are looking for ways to generate income, and some think that writing a book is the way to do it. Certainly, this is absolutely fine as long as you have something important to share and truly believe that you can add value to society. But for a person to write a prompt on an AI platform asking it to write a book about X, Y, and Z and then publish it as if they wrote it is wrong. A person who does that is destroying the dreams and goals of real authors, some of whom are struggling financially in pursuit of those dreams. Now, AI-generated books are adding another economic burden to authors who may need to pay extra fees to add a Human Authored certification to their books.

I think all of this is just ridiculous, and real authors just need to keep writing and publishing their stories without worrying too much about AI. Good books will continue to flourish regardless. Bad books, written by AI or not, will go down a black hole and disappear into the ether.

I’m sure people have all kinds of opinions about this subject, so your comments are welcome. I’m not thinking about writing a book anytime soon, but I would like to hear from you and learn about the different perspectives out there.

One more thing. I’m currently reading the last book on my 2026 reading list. I’m really enjoying These Truths: A History of the United States by Jill Lepore. So I’m adding more books to my 2026 reading list. Of course, I’m not going to finish all the books, and I will move whatever is left to my 2027 list, but I’m really excited about my reading progress. Here is what I’m reading next.

Thanks to a recommendation by Dr. Gerald Stein, I’m also looking at enrolling in the University of Chicago Basic Program of Liberal Education for Adults, a four-year program that explores great works of literature, philosophy, history, and social thought.2 I’m attending an information session next week before making my final decision. So my reading list will continue to grow for sure. 

  1. https://authorsguild.org/human-authored/ ↩︎
  2. https://graham.uchicago.edu/program/basic-program-of-liberal-education/ ↩︎

106 thoughts on “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Books”

  1. A very timely post, Edward! You touched delicate and relevant aspects here. AI is revolutionizing our world, and this includes good and not-so-good things. Using it as a tool to support one’s work, like grammar check, sounds reasonable and maybe even desirable. The problem comes when AI is used to replace (fully) one’s contribution and the person claims it for itself. It struck me hard that authors can now pay to certify that they are human and not AI—it almost touches insanity or some futuristic sci-fi reality. I like to think that though AI may create accurate content in a blink, it will never be able to do it from a soul source, for it’s soulless. And if one is well inner-attuned, one can easily distinguish the origin of the writing. Thank you for this read, my friend—truly important and insightful! With appreciation, sending you light and blessings, always! ✨🙏🍀🌞

    Like

    Reply

  2. I use AI when I feel stuck, such as figuring out what that first sentence in the first paragraph should be. I don’t always use the suggestions, but it sure does help get the creative wheels turning! I find it absolutely amazing!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. That’s probably a great way to use it, kind of like brainstorming to get ideas flowing. I can see it helping people who use digital journals. An AI prompt to start writing a journal entry for a particular day.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  3. I’m not sure if this makes me a lil goblin or what, but I’m looking forward to all of these tech in places we don’t want it utterly collapsing, and we go back to how things have been in the past. For ages, from Zora Neale Hurston to co-eds on public campuses in the 90s in their ripped jeans and flannels have used typewriters and copy machines to write chapbooks and hand them out or start a mailer—total gonzo publishing. Recently, I signed up with a horror blogger called Final Girl After Dark who has the Snail Mail Gang–she actually mails you a letter with some artwork. I’ve met some Gen Z folks who say they are into “analog” technology now, which cracks me up because what my friend meant by that was DVDs over streaming. I would think of analog as being something handwritten or on a reel-to-reel, but what do I know, lol. I know that my husband uses AI at work to sort through data in a meaningful way that would take a human hours of work that is not a good use of time. I’ve also heard how AI plays a role in healthcare now, but I’m not knowledgeable in that.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. That would be wonderful. I, for one, love my analog system (pen, pencil, and paper). I think AI is the future and is going to be incorporated into everything. Smartphones are going to run it, as are cars, home appliances, etc. No way back. Sorting through large amounts of data and creating reports is a key use of AI. Medical breakthroughs are going to be another. Instead of doctors spending days reading and asking other doctors about a particular case, AI will gather data and answer the questions. It will provide a list of diagnoses that the doctor can then verify. It’s going to change medicine in a big way.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. I’m curious about the future legality of who/what is liable if something bad happens. I noticed four people were seriously injured at a hospital after they were given Potassium before surgery instead of another bag, and my first thought was if AI made a mistake.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Well, some of that is ongoing with the AI agent that went rogue the other day. I’m waiting to see who will be liable for that rogue agent that hacked an external network. Since companies and organizations need to procure the AI platform and configure it to support that particular company or organization, and users need to log on, my guess is that the first person to be held liable is going to be the user, then the AI admin, and heads will roll after that. I have seen that mistake before, like 15 years ago. The medic was tired and made a mistake.

          Like

          Reply

        1. That’s true. Unless the author asks AI to highlight text and identify sources for that particular highlighted area, I think AI is capable of that. The author can then add that information in the notes section.

          Like

          Reply

  5. I could say so much on this subject, Edward, but I won’t. What I will say is, I never have, never will use AI to write my books. I write for the joy of writing and the immense satisfaction of bringing a story from its first spark of an idea to its conclusion. Where is the joy in allowing a robot do the work I have spent the last thirty years striving to perfect? And no, my stories are not perfect, but they are mine!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Perfectly expressed, Jean. I don’t see the point of asking AI to write books, but I know many people who use ghostwriters, so maybe those people will use AI instead of paying someone to write their books. I think authors like you are going to be fine. Writing with joy, there is no other way. Thank you. 🙏🏼

      Like

      Reply

  6. This is an interesting article. I remember a few months back, slaving over an article, and after sending my rough draft, the editor responded with what was clearly an AI drafted response. Perhaps it was just copilot, and I know many companies do everything vua copilot now. But either way, I did my job… corrected and sent the updated draft with all the fine tuning I could muster.
    Every spell checking tool seems to be an AI agent now. Out of curiosity, I ran my completed and accepted finaky copy through an AI checker, a free one online, and it came back with results that shocked me. Apparently, my piece that I had slaved over was 65% written (possibly) by AI.
    Knowing that to be false, it made me question how much of the software tools being advertised as capable of spotting the “fake” is actually written to encourage you to spend money… students and educational institutions rely on these to challenge the work of students.
    The danger is that it discredits authentic work.
    The safest bet is to go back writing with pen and paper.

    But I am all for using AI to assist with research. If challenged and used correctly, the Language models will source credible information, and journals etc. It takes much of the heavy lifting when I have big projects to work on. Most people use AI incorrectly, and this is also training the language models .. incorrectly.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. I don’t think those detection tools are going to be of any use in the future. Obviously, as AI learns from us, it will write like us. I think all this controversy is going to go away at some point. That would be something if we need to go back to pen and paper, but what if the person is just rewriting what AI says? 😂 I think writers just need to continue writing, and if it is good, it will find readers. AI is excellent for research, and I use it all the time. Like you said, if you ask for the source, it will provide it, and then you can check to make sure it is valid.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Yes, I do think we should approach it very responsibly, as AI will be educating the next generation and informing and guiding decision makers and policy makers.
        I must admit I still use pen and paper a lot. But then I still have to type, and grammarly is an overbearing tutor at times, lol.
        Always good engaging with you, Edward.
        Solid writing everytime.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Absolutely! Responsible use is a must. Man, I’m also a pen/pencil/paper guy. I have a paper weekly planner, and I only read hard copy books, highlighting and writing notes in my reading notebook. I add some things to my Apple cloud calendar when I need to share an appointment with the family.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  7. Such a timely post on so many levels, Edward! I just learned one of the speakers at the event this weekend is Susan Caesar about “authorship and AI”. I don’t know her, but the topic is intriguing. Excited for you about the Chicago Basic Program…I’ll be interested in what you learn. Go, you! 💝

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Oh, that’s a great topic, and I’m sure it’s going to generate discussion. I know, the basic program looks awesome. Thanks to Dr. Stein for recommending it to me. I’ve been looking for something like that for a few months now, so his recommendation was timely. Thank you, my friend.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    1. AI is the future, so my guess is that the controversy will disappear at some point. It’s like any other technology. People will learn to use it, adapt their routines, and move on.

      Like

      Reply

  9. Dear Edward
    Well, actually we don’t mind how a book was written as long as it is well written.
    Of course, Kb uses AI as a writer for inspiring, researching, and pre-editing. But he writes the text in the end and mostly in the beginning as well. But we see it in photography. Dina is our photographer, a good photo isn’t produced behind the camera but in front of the screen. The skill is how well you can use the programs. That’s creativity. We suppose there we will end up with writing as well. It is an art to use these AI supported programs and like in every industry writers have to learn to use these modern means of production.
    The Fab Four of Cley
    🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. I agree with you 100%. I have yet to read a book written by AI, but I have listened to AI-generated music and short movies, and they are excellent. There are definitely creative minds behind this software, and my guess is that in 5–10 years, many new books will be written with the assistance of AI. There is no way around that. Thank you.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  11. A fascinating and timely reflection on how AI may reshape the world of books and publishing. What I found particularly interesting is the tension between technological possibility and the deeply human nature of storytelling. The future of books will certainly be worth watching, and reading.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  12. if you don’t want ai to hallucinate as much, they want you to fork over more $$. and with the data centers wrecking havoc to the cities and neighboring cities’ electricity and water… and also unseen like how it affects the farm animals, we’re in for it.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Great point, and the free stuff is going away soon. People are going to pay for access to the software, and then they’re also going to pay for software to check the software. 😂 It’s going to be crazy! The environmental impact and resource use are going to be a nightmare. Some companies are starting to use nuclear power for some of those centers.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  13. A thoughtful and timely reflection. I agree with your central point that AI itself is not the problem; how we use it is. Your emphasis on integrity is especially important. Using AI for research, grammar, brainstorming, or editorial assistance is very different from asking AI to write an entire book and then presenting it as one’s own work.

    I would add one nuance: we should be careful not to equate AI-assisted with AI-authored. There is a wide spectrum of legitimate human–AI collaboration, and the real issue is transparency, accountability, and the human author’s genuine intellectual contribution.

    I also think the challenge goes beyond identifying “bad” AI books. The sheer volume of AI-generated content may make it harder for good human writers to be discovered and may even create suspicion around authors who have genuinely done their own work.

    Ultimately, perhaps the most important question is not “Was AI used?”, but “Was it used responsibly, honestly, and without compromising the truth and authenticity of the work?”

    A very worthwhile conversation—and one that writers, publishers, and readers will have to keep having as AI continues to evolve. 🤝

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Great characterization of AI-assisted versus AI-authored. I think AI-assisted is the future for everything we do daily. There is no stopping that, so we need to learn how to use the technology. Great point about the volume of AI-generated content and the difficulties that creates for human writers. At some point, governments around the world will need to step in and create laws that regulate that aspect of AI. Thank you, John. 🙏🏼

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  14. As always thought provoking post, Edward. I am always behind the times in new technology and was one of the few hold outs of FB until my staff convinced me otherwise. TBH my business had a wait list and FB hasn’t helped one bit for that because it’s word of mouth that grows your brand. Personally, I’m astonished at what can be spit out in seconds with AI but it’s frustrating to see creatives struggling because of it. The idea our work is being infiltrated and shared without our permission is maddening. Call me old fashion and I may bite my tongue but there is a place for it and a place where it doesn’t belong. Good for you on your book reading! I love your consideration of your next pursuit❣️ xx

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. You’re spot on about word of mouth. I think that’s the best marketing tool. In my area, they have the Quad Cities’ Best Business Magazine, where people in the region vote for the best companies, and those are listed there. All of them have been excellent in my experience so far. Yeah, AI is something, and I’m not sure what can be done to regulate data collection because the software uses everything that is public, similar to a Google search. There is a company that crossed a line by scanning thousands of books without prior approval, and the company is under investigation, so we’ll see what happens. Thank you, my friend.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. You’re so very welcome, Edward. Yes, I so agree with WOM and I’m certain the Business magazines would ber great help. I’m so glad. I guess it’s here to stay and it will be interesting to see how it plays out! It’s funny I don’t have an issue with Google but probs cuz I’m used to it. I hope justice is served there. You’re so very welcome💕

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  15. a lot of issues have and will come up that we hadn’t planned for or considered. rather than it be a trial and error method of learning, i wish there were some established guardrails or boundaries in place. i feel for all creatives who are suffering because of AI already.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. You’re absolutely right about that. The issues with this technology are only beginning to emerge. Guardrails need to be put in place as soon as possible to avoid a major catastrophe. I agree with you about creatives, now they have another force competing in their space. There are some significant battles ahead, and I hope federal and state governments will side with humans.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  16. Un post muy interesante de hecho Edward me parece que muchos nos preguntamos hasta dónde la IA puede perjudicar o favorecer…
    Pero creo que los libros, sobre todo los buenos libros tienen la facultad de transformar vidas y lo escrito desde el corazón de un ser humano no se compara con lo artificial.
    Gracias por compartir.
    Bonita semana.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Gracias por tu comentario, Elvira. Tienes mucha razón. Lo escrito desde el corazón no se puede comparar con lo artificial. El impacto no es igual sin importar qué tan perfecto se vea el mensaje.

      Like

      Reply

  17. Edward, thanks for raising this troubling issue about AI and the major publishing companies. I had not heard about the allegations that the horror novel “Shy Girl” by Mia Ballard was AI-generated. This is such a dangerous threshold. Imagine a disgruntled or envious reader/friend/agent/writer making such an allegation about one’s work!
    I don’t use AI to write my articles or stories. On the other hand, these generative-AI language models use our creative work–and in many cases without the authors’ permission–to re-create work for those unwilling to do the hard work needed.
    Wow! What a surprise to see my novel, The Twisted Circle, on the top of the pile of fictional books! Thanks very much for your support. Enjoy 😀

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. You’re welcome, Rosaliene. And yes, there is a big controversy surrounding “Shy Girl,” and the publishers discontinued it. I agree with you about disgruntled and envious people. It reminds me of people who say that if you use em dashes or words like “moreover,” then you’re using AI. I just finished reading a book from 1965, and em dashes and the word “moreover” are used throughout it. I guess people aren’t allowed to learn how to write anymore, and sloppy writing is now the standard.

      I’m looking forward to reading your book. I know we talked a little bit about the backstory, so I want to know the whole story.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

        1. I know, that was one of the reasons I left Medium. They were getting annoying with people writing articles about that and Medium deciding its pay model based on things like that. I’m thinking about reading your book next once I finish the one about U.S. history. I’m looking forward to the story.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  18. Hi Edward. I applaud you for completing your 2026 reading list! I only got through one book this year — work keeps getting in the way of enjoying the next book on my list. However, my piano has improved quite a bit. LOL.

    AI has its uses, but it also has it’s issues. We’re still learning exactly what we are going to do with this new tool and how it meshes with our culture. I use AI quite a bit but also end up arguing with it. There was one project where Claude told me to solve it by X and I came back and said that’s not correct and Claude replied with “your solution will work but don’t expect it to always work and here is why my way is better” — But then ChatGPT was like — yeah. This is a good solution.

    As for writing books — It would have been great to have AI when I was writing my Thesis. Sometimes I run my writing through AI just as an editor. When I worked as a Tech Writer, I loved my editor. She really helped a lot. But the words, voice, topic, thoughts, and research are all mine.

    So would that be human authored or human/ai collaboration?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Thank you, Joni. I’m really happy about the progress I’m making with my reading. AI is a great tool, and I’ve used it extensively for research, especially now that it’s integrated into Google Search.

      Your last question is interesting. I’m still trying to figure out the whole AI thing, but I’m going to say “human-authored” as long as AI is used to correct errors in grammar and spelling and to check for plagiarism. Once you allow AI to add paragraphs and ideas that you didn’t come up with, you cross the threshold into human–AI collaboration.

      I see it as being similar to how we use a calculator. A lot of people who graduated from high school know how to multiply, but I don’t think people are going to pull out a pencil and paper every time they want to find the answer to a problem such as 345 × 225. We use a calculator for that, but that doesn’t mean we don’t know how to do math.

      Now, if a first grader came up with the answer to that problem, people would know there was a problem. The first grader probably used a calculator because there’s no way the child did that math independently. The calculator isn’t the problem; it’s how we use it.

      Sorry, but this is the only comparison I can come up with. The autocorrect in Microsoft Word is probably a better example.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  19. Great post, thanks for sharing, most things in life, technology included, have pros and cons, including AI. like Denzel Washington said in a movie, “When you pray for rain you have to deal with the mud”.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  20. Thanks for the shout-out, Edward. The authors I know tell me that getting selected for publication is harder than ever. They also often have to share the cost of the publication and promotion.

    With banning of books in some areas, the world of writing perhaps faces a greater challenge than it ha for a long time. All this is apart from the other social and work/employment impacts of AI predicted by many, and an educational system that doesn’t value trying to create readers such as yourself. We live in a new world on many levels.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. You’re very welcome, Dr. Stein. That’s the sad part of all this: the difficulties that authors are facing and will continue to face as they try to navigate this new environment. Publishers will demand more, and I’m sure that new startups will be created to provide “validation services,” of course using AI, for publishers and authors. In the end, most authors will spend more money than the royalties they receive. A real tragedy!

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  21. Oh, that program exploring literature, philosophy, history, and social thought sounds absolutely Fantastic! I’m so excited for you, and hopefully the information session offers you the ‘right incentives’ to join. As great as your reading list, writing, and philosophical and history lessons have been, I can only imagine how magnificent they’ll become with that particular 4-year program.
    As for AI, I think the most horrifying ‘rumor’ I’ve read is the reports saying millions of books have been bought by AI companies to teach AI how to think and write. The spines are cut off, the books are scanned, and then the original books are destroyed. I can’t even tell you how painful that is to read about. There has to be a better way for AI to scan books without destroying them, and all those books could be easily donated. 😑

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Thank you very much, Rose. Hopefully, everything works out and I’m able to join the program. I think it’s going to be good for me. About the destruction of books, yeah, I read the news about that. I read that they destroyed the books to hide evidence since they were scanning without authorization. There is a big investigation ongoing, but I agree, it’s painful that they destroyed so many books.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    1. Thank you, Natalie. I have been reading about it, and it looks like a great program. They even have an advance program and a travel one, where you can visit some of the locations where those classics were written.

      Like

      Reply

  23. In addition to AI sucking up the water and electricity, it’s sucking all the air out of the creative writing room. I’m sick to death of hearing about it. I’m writing my stories and poems myself, the way I always have. I also create my book covers myself with no AI generation.

    I’m a member of the Authors Guild, and I have registered my books with the “Human Authored” badge, but I haven’t been able to bring myself to put it on my books. Part of it is stubbornness that I shouldn’t have to defend my own writing. The other part is that the certification is a bit disingenuous because the Authors Guild has done nothing to actually verify that the books have been human-authored. (It would be impossible in the first place!)

    On the other hand, what the glut of AI books on the market has done is prompt me to pull back on money and time spent on marketing and promotion online and focus on my core audience and going local, particularly with libraries to do the things I actually enjoy.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Absolutely, and my guess is that technology is going to advance, making most of those data centers obsolete, and all we are going to have is a bunch of big abandoned warehouses all over the country—a big waste of space. I agree with you about the Authors Guild, and I read that they are not actually verifying anything and that it’s all based on the honor system. I think what you are doing is the right approach. Like I said, good books will find their way to readers. Word of mouth is the best marketing there is.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. You’re probably right about the ultimate fate of all these data centers. It wouldn’t surprise me. All of the pitchforks and burning torches of the AI Police doesn’t seem particularly useful. Let books rise or fall on their own merits.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. I totally agree about the AI police. It’s a waste of time, if you ask me, and I think there’s a financial motivation behind it all. People are going to be buying software to proofread and validate content. At the end of the day, a bad book is a bad book, regardless of who wrote it.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  25. Good for you Edward, you’re such an inspiration to keep learning. I never even considered AI writing books ughhh that’s disastrous 😩😩

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  26. You have a very practical and measured approach to books and AI. I tend to be skeptical of all the AI claims for technology breakthroughs. What is for sure is AI is driving a huge build out of data centers that is creating a water and energy crisis.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  27. AI certainly introduces many ethical considerations, Edward. Personally, I love to write so I would never consider getting AI to write for me. It frustrates me, though, that others are okay with passing of AI generated content as their own original work.

    I have been thinking about writing a book as a follow up to the chapter I wrote in the recent Retirement Coaches Association book about decluttering your life as you head into retirement. I also have an idea for a children’s story book that I might work on first. So many possibilities…

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Absolutely, Michelle. I personally don’t understand why a person would let AI write a whole book. I would think that an author wants to share his or her story, the human aspect. An AI-generated book does not meet that intent. I’m not sure what the future holds on this issue.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  28. What a thoughtful and thought-provoking essay, Edward. I really like your distinction of, “this is absolutely fine as long as you have something important to share and truly believe that you can add value to society. ”

    Adding value — it seems like the fundamental consideration that is often overlooked. So much of the AI slop that is being generated isn’t passing that test which I think is often the case when humans get a new technology and try to figure out how to use it. I agree with you that good books will continue to flourish and rise above — as will good essays like this one.

    Thanks for the shout-out and great topic, my friend!

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. You’re very welcome, Wynne. I think adding value is key. It’s like reading self-help books. Once you’ve read three or four good books on time management, there’s really no value in reading more books on the subject. It gets repetitive and is usually a waste of time. Thank you, my friend.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

        1. That’s right, my friend. 😀 Once you learn how to manage priorities, set your calendar and to-do list according to your priorities, and start executing, adjusting as you learn new lessons, there is no reason to keep reading more on the subject.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  29. You talk like it is the writers who are the only ones suffering.
    As a reader, I have very finite time, and every time I pick up an ai book without knowing it, my precious irretrievable time is gone. And there are a lot more readers just like me, suffering through the slush piles.

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. I haven’t experienced that so far, but I hear you. I’m really not sure how to solve that problem, but I usually spend some time researching a book and author before I get my hands on it. Thank you for reading and commenting.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. If you don’t mind me asking, how many books a year do you read? I ask because researching one author for a series of 10 books is one thing, but what about 10 authors who each have a single book?
        Do you have a guideline for researching or is that time part of the reading process? For me, reviewing is part of the whole process, so I don’t mind that time sink.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Great question, and let me start by saying that I don’t read a lot of fiction, so my focus is on nonfiction in the areas of history, leadership, religion, and current affairs. In the last year and a half, I have been getting my feet wet with philosophy. I’m also adding more fiction to the mix. Last year I read 21 books, and I have read 25 books so far this year. For nonfiction, I look at the subject and then spend a few days reading about the author, especially his or her background. Fiction takes me longer because the story needs to pull me in. I buy hard copies of all the books I read, so I take my time and follow my gut, which serves me well 99% of the time. Your case is different because it looks like you are a book reviewer, so you probably read a lot of books, so my method is not going to work for you, and I understand your frustration. I only do book reviews on books that I purchased. I don’t read ebooks, and I look for added value to support my lifelong learning goals.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

Leave a comment