Have you tried talking to chatGPT or any other AI program about your story?

[NOOR_ASAKZ05]

Well I read all your comments and it's great to notice all this interaction... Anyway, I use ChatGPT for research purposes to help make the story more realistic... For example, I research mental illnesses and how people with them behave because my story needs this illness to exist... In addition, I showed him my drawings and asked if they fit the Seinen classification and he told me that the drawing doesn't matter as long as it is clear and the story is good... Well, it was a really great answer... Well, I also use it to understand some cultures because the characters in my story are from different cultural backgrounds... I also use it to translate dialogues (because I am Arab) and well, it sometimes gives me an evaluation of the dialogue and how good it is, and this does not change much in the story... I may have used it to make a cover for the manga, but this is because I was under a lot of pressure and did not have time to draw, but now I am working on drawing a cover that I made only... I do not mind using Ai in these topics, but the idea of making an entire story from it is annoying. I remember that on one of the Arabic websites, the administrators deleted an entire story because it was drawn by Ai and how I Happy....well I know I talked a lot and I have to go finish studying. Bye.

[moontokkym]

Hey just so you don't get stuck with this, specifically for the mental illness and cultural stuff: ChatGPT will spit out what is said the most about a subject, and the words most associated with the name of the illness or the country of origin of the culture.

Thus, it's going to be heavily biased for the mental illnesses that have strong stigmas around them and the cultures that are often stereotyped but rarely deeply explored. It is also heavily biased depending on the questions you ask, which can be leading questions without you realising it, based on your bias. Though it's been programmed to steer clear of obvious hate speech, it's been known to be surface level on spectrum disorders like autism to the point of caricature sometimes. It is also capable of inventing studies out of thin air (cf the lawyer who got disbarred for using ChatGPT instead of PACER and ChatGPT just invented a pdf of court cases).

For accurate info especially on divisive and stigmatised subjects, you'd be better off using Wikipedia and scrolling through the footnotes, seeing as you'll have to double check all the info the AI spits at you anyway. You have a wealth of diversity here on the forums, and many people who would be perfectly happy to inform you about their culture and life in a way no AI ever could. Don't spit in their faces by insinuating that their humanity can be replicated by predictive text.

The pressure excuse isn't good. Everyone here has commitments and stuff that needs to be done and pressure in life. You should love your comic enough that making it is what feeds your soul, and by using AI for the cover you've made an insult to the rest of your hard work by putting it under a neon sign that says "I'm too lazy to actually care about artists". If you are under pressure, you just don't publish the comic until the cover is ready, simple as that. You're not under contract for this, you don't have deadlines, you can post a week later and be fine.

Even taking away the ethical problems with genAI you've shot your entire comic in the foot by having the first image people see of it be some cheap approximation of humanity, and it's false advertising because it's not the style or actual quality of what's in the comic. Even people who don't care about AI will feel like you lied to them, no wonder you aren't getting views. This hurts you, your comic, and the art community as a whole, and yet you still don't care enough to decide to do the thing that is better for everyone.

[NOOR_ASAKZ05]

I also do this in terms of research and verification. As for the pressure issue, I was committed to a special appointment and I was late for it, but okay, I accept your point of view.

[moontokkym]

Again: chatgpt is capable of lying to you and because it does not give sources (or when asked gives sources that aren't the origin of the claims) you cannot verify the veracity of information through it. You have to use a classic search engine or paper publisher for that.

Ok, you were late for an appointment, and life comes first, I get it. I was on hiatus for over a year because life got too busy, I'm back on posting hiatus now while I build up my backlog of pages again. I work 3 jobs, there was a terrorist attack at one of them 2 weeks ago, one of them I get paid in a different currency and the conversion rates have changed so I'm now working for less money, I've got a lot on. Using AI would still never cross my mind because it would tarnish my reputation beyond repair, everything I'd ever drawn would be thrown into question. Again, that ruin is not worth having the comic out now rather than in a week or two.

Your one saving grace at the moment is that your actual drawings aren't that good, and you make the type of human mistakes AI doesn't make, so we can easily identify what's yours and what's not. If you ever improve to the point those mistakes aren't as visible, this is going to haunt you and cast doubt over your hard work.

[michoverse]

AI is useful for correcting grammatical mistakes and sentences structure, as for coming up with ideas it is very bad and cliché, plus we write and draw because we like it so so why would we make ai do the creative parts (assuming is was any good).
Now as for talking with AI about my story, it's just so frustrating because the AI still can't understand nuance, context or multiple pages at the same time...but I wouldn't be against it if it were any better, I would love someone to discuss with any story ideas I have, like talking to a non creative friend but actually will listen all the time and is interested (of course as I said before, current models are lacking).

[NOOR_ASAKZ05]

Oh, I'm sorry about what happened to you. That's terrible. I hope life gets better for you.

[NOOR_ASAKZ05]

Getting the opinion of a friend or family member is helpful because at least they won't forget who the characters are and won't say, "Oh, she's the killer's daughter, right?" So I prefer this option even if my friends describe me as violent.

[moontokkym]

That's really not the focus of what I'm saying. I'm illustrating that even when you're busy, the answer is to not publish the comic yet, rather than push out crappy AI and overshadow your work.

[michoverse]

That's why I said that current models are not yet ready to function as friends. It's main problem is the memory. But friends will not listen to hours of rambles about a random story while the ai might (even without a useful feedback).
As for being described as violent well maybe an advanced AI might describe you as violent or eevn a psychopath for all we know

[cherrystark]

I know a lot of authors who use AI in their novels, and their sales are just fine and improving every day. It's just a tool. I recently used ChatGPT to help me brainstorm a list of names that I could call superpowered people that weren't mutant/metahuman, since both of them are either copyrighted or heavily associated with copyrighted works. It gave me a list of names and helped take my 2-3 page prologue and create a plan to turn it into a 2-3 book series ON TOP of my original story idea. It also helped me develop some key points in my main series that I never would have thought of on my own. You don't magically lose your ability to choose what works best for your work or become legally obligated to use everything generated.

chatgpt is capable of lying to you and because it does not give sources (or when asked gives sources that aren't the origin of the claims) you cannot verify the veracity of information through it. You have to use a classic search engine or paper publisher for that.

This is incorrect. Technology is incapable of lying to you. It can only give you an answer based on the input it's received and the dataset it's programmed with (ex., original Dewey Decimal System versus Modern Library Systems) You may get a piece of information that is incorrect because the technology is improving. Even if you were to search for information on the subject manually, you'd still find incorrect or incomplete information.

[drewdoniger]

Oh hey, that writer is me.

[moontokkym]

For context, I say "it is capable of lying to you" because that is functionnally what it can do. I referred earlier to a case of lawyers being sanctioned for use of ChatGPT instead of the legal database PACER. This is specifically in reference to the 2023 case of Schwartz and LoDuca.

The reason they were sanctioned is because when they asked ChatGPT to give them examples of cases that would be a legal precedent useful to their case, the AI invented fictitious lawsuits complete with full fictitious pdf legal filings, and when asked where the files were from, said "from PACER". The files had been entirely fabricated by the chatbot despite it's insistance that the cases were real, and sourced from PACER when asked. This, despite the technology not having intent, if done by a human, would constitute a barefaced lie.

[Citrus0915]

I use DeepSeek to give me feedback. But i found out that it's generally biased and the phrasing of the requests can change what the AI will respond with.
In other words, I only use it for confirmation and a ego-boost. Sometimes it works as a grammarly. Or a brainstorm place where I can refine plot points and change logical errors. I'd never use it for writing nor considering its 'edits'.

[ThunderChicken]

I would rather eat dirt. I’d rather pass a kidney stone. I’d rather masturbate with a fistful of thumbtacks.

There are not enough letters in the word “no” to adequately express the no-ness of my answer

[cherrystark]

I understand that the results may be inaccurate, but it does not change the fact that technology is incapable of lying. It can only operate within the bounds given by a human operator. So if an AI program generated a fictional lawsuit, it was because it was asked to. It did not upload itself into the court's system, and the lawyers weren't required to use it. They chose to do it themselves.

ChatGPT is how people imagined computers to be in the 1960s and early 1970s.

[KevinReijnders]

You're just being incredibly pedantic about the word "lying" here and it's incredibly disingenuous.

[cherrystark]

Why? Do you blame Photoshop for people's poor body image issues? Walmart and McDonald's for people's overeating? It's one of the basic facts of technology that it can only operate within the bounds of its programming. It can't lie. It can only follow its programming.

[skullforceagents]

So I’m not one of these “I hate everything AI” people, but I personally prefer to write and illustrate my own work instead of using AI. I have definitely consulted AI for advice on marketing though.

If you want to use it, who am I as some guy to tell you not to. Personally, I won’t use it myself.

[moontokkym]

I think there might be a miscommunication about what happened in this case. The sequence of events described by the sanctionned lawyers under oath was thus:
- They asked ChatGPT to give them names of cases in which a certain clause of a law was used.
- ChatGPT invented names of cases that did not exist, never have existed, between fictional people.
- The lawyers asked ChatGPT where the names of these cases were sourced.
- ChatGPT said the names were sourced from PACER, which was not the case, as the names were made up by word association by the robot.
- The lawyers asked ChatGPT to give them the full legal filings from these cases
- ChatGPT presented correctly formatted multiple page ficticious legal filings.
- The lawyers again asked where these legal filings were sourced.
- ChatGPT again said that the legal filings were from PACER, when they were not, they had been fabricated by ChatGPT

This is not just "it made an error and accidentally communicated preexisting misinformation", the AI created new misinformation, commonly referred to as lying.

I believe OpenAI refers to this capacity to just make shit up like 2.12 being larger than 2.9 as "phantasms" if you prefer that lingo, but ChatGPT just making up fibs that are not prior existing misinformation on the internet and then insisting it's correct is a known phenomenon, making it entirely unreliable. This is also not the only case in which ChatGPT did this TO LAWYERS, there have been multiple lawyers sanctionned at this point for relying on fabricated chatgpt legal filings as precedents since, I remembered this one because I read the ChatGPT produced legal filings when it happened, but going back to look up the names of the guys lead me to tens of articles about multiple other cases including in federal courts.

[AshanaArt]

I feel like a cover is a pretty important aspect of your story, it’s what people go off of to decide whether to click on your novel or not. If people see an a
AI generated cover, they’ll probably assume the whole thing is AI generated which isn’t a good first impression to draw people into seeing your story. Also, unless you specifically trained a model off your own art, it steals artwork from other people to make an image, so it could be considered theft. AI also doesn’t understand the point of your story, so it’s not going to be able to make a good cover- your cover is an opportunity to create intrigue for your story, and only you can understand what the most interesting aspects are. If your running late for an appointment you could always hiatus, it’s much better to take longer to finish something if it means you can deliver a hand drawn piece.

Using it as a starting point for research is ok imo, since it can give you a summery of a topic if you don’t know where to start, but you should do more, in depth research into the specific aspects of a culture you plan to include in your story as well as more specific mental illnesses you want to include since AI can make stuff up and is not a trustworthy source.