Calling Sam Altman & Marc Andreessen writers is like calling Albert Einstein a poet because he's been quoted often.

Love this episode (except for the hallucinated presence of Marc and Sam).

Interstingly, all the writers agreed with the functional benefits LLMs have (searching, editing, refined information consuming), but mostly all the creative writers mentioned the pattern-generated machine opposed their creative soul.

Love the episode for its diversity of views in how AI is used in Writing! Keep It Up David! It's helpful!

I just discovered this channel two weeks ago, and I gleaned a lot of useful information from David Baldacci and the Hachette CEO. I thought this might become one of my new favourite channels on YouTube, but then this video props up Sam Altman as a legitimate voice on AI in writing. First, it’s a conflict of interest, because Altman runs ChatGPT. Second, what he says about wanting to make things faster and easier is wrong right out of the gate, because he has missed the entire point of writing. Yes, human writing can be flawed. But that’s because it’s human. And that’s okay. It isn’t meant to be perfect. It’s meant to tell stories. And a machine that has not lived a human life cannot tell human stories.
The choice to include Altman in this video has lowered my esteem of this channel significantly.

If you partner with AI in writing, who’s to say it won’t scrape your work and resell it to you or others, causing you to lose your originality?

It's decent for spell check and grammar checks. Great for research as well.

i mean research assistant fine, but when you start going to the editorial territory it will be dangerously easy to fall into the thinking of "just let ai write it anyway". but another interesting thing about ai art is that significant portions of the population would refuse to entertain it in the first place if they know it's like mostly made by ai, while others will just shrug their shoulders.

Maybe letting go of "trying to be perfect" is the key. Magnificent, wonderful, spectacular does not need to be perfect to be magnificent, wonderful or spectacular. Even being better does not need to be perfect.

Having Sam Altman & Marc Andreessen in the thumbnail, portraying them as writers, is devious. I haven't watched the first 5 seconds, and I've already lost a ton of respect and trust in you and your content. Been watching for over a year, and I am very disappointed.

Could not possibly care less what Marc Andreesen or Sam Altman think about "writing" with AI

I do love using Claude for  very specific thing. Bringing order to my chaos. I'm not a very orgnized person, but when I gather all information that I have in word files or written down on paper, when working ona a story outline, I put all my messy lore, stoy strucuture ideas, character inofs and arcs into it and it gives me a very well strucutred document that ordrs everything and shows me what I'm still missing. I love it. Especially for messy multi pov stories. It's also good for research or fact checking if some of my ideas actually are scienitifically bulletproof (for a dystopian scenrio and its lore). I don't like the writing of AI though. I'm not a huge fan of purple prose and like minimalistic prose and subtext (I still use both, dependnig on what I want to achieve, but often lean more puristic). And with AI writing every single little infodump reads like a 1 page poem. I hate it. So as of right now I'm definitely not in danger of using it to write for me lol

Everyone's talking about Sam Altman no one is talking about the fact that Steven Pinker was friends with Jeffrey Epstein, flew on his plane and helped his lawyer build a case for him when he was charged with sexual assault in 2006

Dafaque Sam Altman is doing there? How the hell is he a writer? Does writing a code counts as being a writer or what? Disregarding how stupid it is to ask a salesman if you should buy his product.

Appreciated Ezra Klein's perspective.

What wbout the fact that anything that uses AI cannot be copyrighted? Your book isn't your property any more. Amazon can just take your name off it and sell it without you.

A.I. is funny - laugh out loud funny. Is the occasional added line from A.I. going to ruin my book or make it better? I know what I think. But no publisher would touch it.

Unsubscribed. Turns out it's just another marketing channel getting rich from AI-related sponsorships while disguising as a platform for artists. Inviting a tech billionaire to promote their own AI company to your audience of writers is especially low.

Perhaps AI is a Godsend.  After all, God has sometimes sent plagues in the past, so why not now?

Reading some of these comments is like having Bob Ross freak out over digital painting, saying "real painters use real brushes, real paper and mix their own paints for the human experience.

What does the word 'better' mean when it comes to the arts? 🤔 AI will never be 'better' because its like comparing apples with oranges. AI writing and human creativity are completely different endeavors. I'm an author, and don't touch GenAI in anything creative. I agree with Maria Popova, Riva Tez, and Yann Martel.

Please no Ezra K.