Machine vision is another term for self-learning machine language. OpenAI has released Chatbot and drawn the most attention, along with Bing and Bard. Other competitors are Anthropic, Mindverse, and True Era. However, you may need to realize that you have been utilizing A.I. applications for years with Siri, Cortana, Google Assistant, Alexa, Elsa Speak, Socratic, Fyle, Databot, Hound, and Youper, to name just a few. The A.I. wars have begun, and human creators must be aware of the shifting world. Using Grammarly, Word, Google, or any editing tool, including myself, is common among writers today. I have utilized DALL*E for cover photo generation.
There is no doubt about these tools’ power and commercial benefit to working quickly and efficiently. The cost savings to a company could be the difference in financial survival or not. My concerns are centered on my creations for publication and the desire to compete on an even playing field. Universities are struggling with the invasion of A.I. being utilized by students to write papers that are supposed to be their sole creations. Some are taking a hardline with penalties, while others are embracing it.
Vocal has successfully utilized A.I. as an initial curator of submitted works to speed the publication process and compliance with policies and procedures. I do not need to know how Vocals business model functions or how it works. They appear to blend the A.I. process with human oversight for Top Stories and Judging for challenges. I respect the platform’s use of the technology as I am sure it reduces their expenses to continue to operate.
The dilemma is the apparent influx of A.I. generated content in articles, stories, and even comments to other creators that the submitter presents as their work. Here we have a potential problem. The commenter must scan the work into their system where the A.I. analyzes the story to generate a book cover level comment but also has consumed the voice, style, and structure of the Vocal creator. You could argue that humans do the same when another writer’s creation is read. The machine vision A.I. would then be able to sort the best of the best to generate new creations that a human may not compete with. It is just a matter of time.
Possible Solutions
1. Require full disclosure on any work in the header, other than editing tools, on each story, poem, or article submitted. The reverse A.I. tools have arrived on the scene of battle but are quirky at best. Non-disclosure is a terminating offense. A simple checkbox in the subtitle line would be a solution where it creates a banner notification for the reader.
2. Develop a system where creators are validated, as being human, for their Vocal account. Currently, several apparent Vocal Accounts are A.I. and have seeded the Facebook Vocal Community Pages and utilize this as the foundation of their entry into Vocal.
3. Ban A.I. generated comments in the wonderful tool Vocal provided for creators last year. Classify it as spam.
4. Consider A.I. only generated Challenges for those who play in this sandbox to compete against their own.
To be or not to be?
Artificial intelligence and its sprint to take over content creation are here to stay. The war is blazing hot and escalating rapidly. Too much money is at stake for the winners and annihilation for the losers.
Now is the time to get a handle on the evolving influx of this expanding technology on Vocal. Vocal’s mission of providing a platform for human creators of all the arts worldwide is why I support the company one hundred percent and the key to its success. I count on Vocal, as our publisher of choice, to protect our human-created work now and in the future. Anything less than this contradicts the mission and does not bode well for the future of any of us.
Thank you, Vocal, for all you do in providing a safe space for me and others to create.
