In today’s Get Rec’d post, we featured Stars Die by Jenny Schwartz, which is part of a series that many readers, including folks in our community, enjoyed very much.
Unfortunately, we were alerted in the comments that the cover is AI-generated.
I downloaded the cover and ran it through several different scanners. The result: +98% likely it was AI-generated. The cover art is credited to Canva, which offers generative AI to users.
I really dislike generative AI. It stole from me: I’m part of the Anthropic settlement. I also know that gen-AI has scraped the entire website and used it for training. I will receive no compensation for that theft of twenty years of my work. I hate that the Google AI at the top of a search will used the scraped content as a summary, and prevent users from clicking through to discover more, thereby harming my ability to stay in business.
I hate that generative AI harms writers and artists. I hate that it pollutes entire neighborhoods, disproportionately affecting Black communities.
I hate that it destroys our water supply, and sucks up energy and the elements we need to survive in order to provide sub-standard information and images.
I’ve already written about the proliferation of AI-narrators and allegedly AI-written books and the number of titles bought unknowingly by librarians, many of whom would much rather spend their limited budgets on titles written by humans. And I know that more works generated by AI are coming. There is very, very little I can do about it.
Except I can do this: going forward, upon confirmation of AI-generated content, I will remove the buy links and copy copy for any AI-generated book in our database. I will replace AI-generated cover art in our database with an alert that the cover was AI-generated, and that image will accompany the book listing.
I will also replace the cover copy with the following:
The cover copy and buy links for this title have been removed due to the cover being AI-generated art. We do not knowingly promote generative AI material, written or visual, because of the loss of jobs for artists and writers, the toll on local communities and the environment we share, and the predatory theft of copyright materials to fuel and train generative AI models.
We are also humans, and sometimes we don’t catch when something is AI. Thank you for alerting us; this notice will remain to inform others who also want to avoid generative AI books and art.
Here is what that looks like in practice:
That new listing for the book will also appear on the original post, such as in today’s Get Rec’d.
This isn’t fun. I don’t enjoy this, to be clear. This sucks in at least six different ways. As I mentioned, members of the community have enjoyed the series! And we’re literally actually factually in the business of helping people find books they will like.
And I don’t know much about this book except that the cover is 98% likely to be generative AI. Is the book itself generative-AI-written? I have no idea. Can I determine that? Probably I can, but I’m not interested in buying and scanning the book and using my time in that manner.
If the cover is generative AI, that is all I need to know. I don’t want to promote or profit from any work with generative AI on the front or inside.
And, yes, because we’re humans (really truly humans! ask me about my anxiety!) we don’t always catch the gen-AI materials. I’m not great at it; I’m better than I used to be, but I’m not as skilled as other people are.
This is our stance and our response to works produced by generative AI. And this is what we’re going to do going forward here in this little corner of vintage internet run by humans (hi!).
From another genuine human facing AI competition on many, many fronts: Thank you.
Thank you for doing this. Just thinking about AI and all the issues you highlighted makes my blood rage. I too am part of the Anthropic settlement, which is only a drop in the bucket. And while I like money as much as the next person and believe it is owed, I would prefer AI to implode and disappear.
Thank you!
Thank you so much for doing this. I’ve noticed that Audible has multiple audio books in their Audible Plus catalog that are narrated by AI “voices,” and I refuse to listen.
Part of the reason I enjoy audio books is because I like listening to the narration by my favorite narrators, and I’ve bought audio books narrated by the ones I like best because I want to support their work.
I love your little corner of the vintage Interwebs. <3
Booo and hisssss on AI. I hate it so much. Am I personally impacted by it via IP theft? No, but I like art made by humans, not art made by computers. We have creative, wonderful, amazing brains that make beautiful, amazing, incredible things, and the tech bros want to rob us not only of the product, but of the experience of thinking and creating those things. I feel absolute rage every time I open a PDF that's just a few pages long and it prompts me to "save time with an AI summary".
Pay artists to do art, period. I don't care if it makes the final product cost more because you had to pay an actual human for their talent and time. I will happily pay more to support people over tech bros who will kill us all with their computer-generated pollution and consumption of resources.
As a librarian, I see my colleagues trying to purchase materials and sort through the computer-generated trash to provide their patrons with real human art and the human creators with real money. Nobody can catch it all, so when you notice it, please reach out to the library and let them know that the audiobook or ebook they bought is AI!
Thanks, y’all!
I just need to tell y’all this: I get an email when there’s a new comment on a post of mine, so your posts are in my inbox and on the site (I can manage moderation from email too). So I read your comments and then the next email reads, “Boost your Smartbitchestrashybooks Com website’s traffic with AI! Watch this….”
NOOOOOOOoooooOOOooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
Thank you so much for doing this! I truly appreciate you doing the work.
Nothing makes me feel more old than my 13 year old glancing at something and saying instantly “that’s AI” when I think (if I think anything at all) it’s either bad Photoshop or bad artistic choices. I also find it very helpful b/c like others I don’t want my money going to AI. He’s my first screener before I check elsewhere.
Thanks to the Smart Bs for fighting the good fight.
Another Anthropic-settlement author here, and Sarah, I say THANK YOU and BRAVA. AI is toxic to literature and to writers, as well as to communities and to our environment.
Thank you for the statement and action plan! I really appreciate the hard work you all do on this site to make it the haven it is. AI slop is insidious and irritating, and very hard to catch at a glance, by design. (My eye is only tuned to it because a) I’m terminally online, and b) filtering it is a small part of my day job.) That’s what makes it all the more important for us to speak up and help each other spot it. Many eyes make light work…?
Thank you for this! At least ten of my pirated novels were used to train AI, but I’m not eligible for the Anthropic settlement because I didn’t pay the money to register them with the U.S. Copyright Office. There might be uses of generative AI that would actually help humanity, but I have yet to see one in practice.
I just finished reading Empire of AI by Karen Hao (really well done but infuriating!!). I was already anti-AI because of the theft from artists and the damage it was doing to the environment, but I had no idea the exploitation it was doing globally to the most vulnerable populations. Thank you for standing up and doing what you can!
My sympathies to all the writers whose time, effort and imagination were stolen to train AI.
“Can I determine that? Probably I can,”
Problem is, though, that’s not actually possible to do. We can’t really tell the well-made AI stuff from human-made stuff, and the AI detectors online are only accurate some of the time. Written text is, like, the number one subject where we can’t be sure if something is AI-made.
I see more and more examples online of people being falsely accused of using AI. Online, I see people responding “Thank you, ChatGPT” to every person who posts texts that uses an em dash.
It’s weird. Em dashes have been used by humans for longer than any of us have been alive, but still people insist it’s a sign that a text was not written by humans.
And another issue is, a “human-made” text might still have one sentence in fifty written by ChatGPT, or have the plot and characters made by ChatGPT but prose that’s 100% human-written, so in those cases, it wouldn’t be possible to look at the prose to determine anything.
This reply became a bit long, but I feel it’s super important to spread the word about how AI text detectors don’t tend to work reliably. If I can’t tell if something is AI-written on my own, then I can’t tell, full stop. (And IMO, the only times that I, or anyone, actually can tell on our own is if it’s one of the bullet point lists with tons of emojis and gratuitous bolding.)
Any style can be written by humans, and copied by AI.
Good on y’all!
Thank you for doing this work. I hate the way intellectual property theft by AI is so casually accepted. I try not to buy anything generated by AI, but it is not always easy for individuals to tell. Eventually, we may be able to have strong regulations against AI in place.
Another point against AI: the absolute worst people who own it. Good piece from Josh Marshall (I hope this link jumps the paywall. I think it does):
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/ai-the-bright-shiny-object-at-the-crossroads-of-the-future/sharetoken/2df708ac-ec70-4bce-8cbc-b40806b99caf
Quote:
Then you have the how and the why of those at the commanding heights of Silicon Valley throwing their weight in with the global authoritarian movement.
They’re just the bad guys right now. I don’t trust them one iota! The technology itself is neutral. But the decisions they have made so far (theft of human creators) doesn’t reassure me. I will say I read a poll that 80% of Americans dislike AI. That’s, dare I say, pretty bipartisan! And yet our leaders don’t listen.
Baller moves as always Sarah!
Thank you for your stance on this. I’m on the Board of Trustees of an environmental organization, therefore I’m on the mailing list of a several newsletters related to fundraising. It’s been annoying the crap out of me, all the emails I get telling me how my non-profit can use AI for fundraising.
Thank you!
My husband’s aunt’s work as a professor was scraped, too, and I’m the one who found it and had to tell her.
Thanks for doing this Sarah! I wonder if anyone knows if traditional publishers have started using gen AI covers, and if “no AI” is something authors can have in their contract. If not, I hope that trend is coming. I’d be so sad if I ever had a traditional publishing deal and then the publisher created an AI cover.
Thank you for taking an anti-AI stance! It’s more important than ever. Hopefully we can get more transparency from publishers and indie authors about artists’ names so that it’s easier to track what is human-made and what is AI slop. Artists deserve credit! Art thieves deserve nothing!
AI also trains on (and creates) CSAM with impunity.
It is honestly the most messed up human invention of the modern age.
I’m glad you’re taking a stand! Meanwhile, I searched two public libraries via Libby, and found that neither of them actually has a single one of Jenny Schwartz’s novels. They show covers (WorldCat scrape?Amazon scrape?) and offer to notify me if they ever get them. Your current discovery that at least one cover is AI kinda makes poor Jenny look questionable as a human! Her whole web site looks AI (she credits WordPress). A dive into WorlcCat shows her to be mostly self-published except for some early Harlequins. Is she doing herself a disservice by embracing AI? Hm. I mean no disrespect, but I hope she’s real.
Addendum: It does seem tone-deaf for a writer (self-published or otherwise) to exploit the work of a graphic artist! I will also mention that the label you are applying sort of invites the careless reader to conclude that not just the cover, but the whole novel could be AI-generated. Just sayin’
Jane I don’t know if conventional publishers have started to use AI to make covers. I do know that John Scalzi the science fiction author has had ‘No use of AI’ for covers into his contract with Tor. I can’t find the post about it on ‘Whatever’ – his blog, but have asked for a link.
Late to the game, but want to second drewbird’s rec of Karen Hao’s Empire of AI. She really gets to the essence of the problem, that AI is a modern-day colonialist force, claiming space in our minds, relationship, environment, etc. Her interview with Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman is terrific, and very understandable, even if, like me, you’re not an expert. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xa6JuimHoEA
Thank you so much Sarah & SBTB for your staunch, ethics-based stance. Really appreciate all the informative links you included as receipts too!
As an artist, crafter & editor I am disgusted at the way AI is being pushed not primarily as a useful admin tool (which it can be) but instead as a super-speedrun to creative theft, destruction of artistic jobs, and disengagement of all research-related activity in our own human brains. It’s been so frustrating seeing friends who are social justice advocates blithely addict themselves to using chatGPT & similar platforms, seeming to ignore the negative impacts altogether!
I really hope more review & rec sites follow your example, and ditto readers too – feels like the only way to effectively push back against poor author/publisher choices in this space!