Editors for Clarkesworld, a popular sci-fi and fantasy magazine, has had to put the proverbial breaks on accepting story submissions intended for review and publication, due to receiving an influx of them being composed by AI chatbots, namely ChatGPT. The below disclaimer has since been added to their submissions page:

We are not considering stories written, co-written, or assisted by AI at this time.

Neil Clarke, editor-in-chief of Clarkesworld authored this on his blog;

“Since the early days of the pandemic, I’ve observed an increase in the number of spammy submissions to Clarkesworld. What I mean by that is that there’s an honest interest in being published, but not in having to do the actual work. Up until recently, these were almost entirely cases of plagiarism, first by replacing the author’s name and then later by use of programs designed to “make it your own.” The latter often results in rather ham-fisted results […]

Towards the end of 2022, there was another spike in plagiarism and then “AI” chatbots started gaining some attention, putting a new tool in their arsenal and encouraging more to give this “side hustle” a try. It quickly got out of hand […]

I’ve reached out to several editors and the situation I’m experiencing is by no means unique. It does appear to be hitting higher-profile “always open” markets much harder than those with limited submission windows or lower pay rates.[…]

No, it’s not the death of short fiction (please just stop that nonsense), but it is going to complicate things.”

Read the rest of Clarke’s insightful and timely post about the inconvenience of this artificial phenomenon and/or side-hustle tool, here: http://neil-clarke.com/a-concerning-trend/

LIT-B is not on the fence about “AI” writing; I wholeheartedly reject it.

Machine learning to what end, certainly not teaching us how to be better writers? Profiting those who haven’t taken the time to discover the value of process, is all “AI” stories seem to be doing, because those writers who put in the effort to create really are the better for it. Wisdom is earned through experience/process. When a tool no longer obeys and auto fills plot points, writers block, or misspellings, what has been gained? The odd, long-about path one takes in order to reach the nearby truism is fraudulent, procedurally generated entropy disguised as narrative design, served with a side of dopamine.

I commend editors like Neil Clarke who see the detriment of people using “AI” software as co-authors and thinking that is behaviour to aspire to. Just because there is advertisements for it, like Grammarly, doesn’t mean it should be unequivocally accepted among consumers. Folly!

Imagining is easy (intuitive), but the writing comes harder for me, but therein lies the reason I stick to it; part of the reward feeling accomplished, is occasionally, discovering something new about myself or the world around me. As cliche as it sounds: Writing is purposeful; transformative; never-ending. Drawing, painting, designing, sculpting, any and all forms of creative expression is human expression, and human achievement does not need a crutch.

“AI” wordbots need a leash, but an accountable watermark will do just as well.