AI Generated Text Is Only a Threat if We Lose Our Freedom of Choice

I’ve always aspired to make some sort of contribution to humanity. I’ve daydreamed about discovering a breakthrough that would allow the human race to pierce the veil of lies that trick us into inflicting harm on one another.You won’t find the answer by sifting through the collected works of history. The fact that we are not living in an enlightened age is evidence that the ultimate discovery is still out there waiting to be found.Generative AI can only repackage what we already know. It can add special effects, but no soul. You could put The Odyssey in space, but it’s still The Odyssey. You can’t reveal anything about the unknown by placing an ancient work in a dynamic new setting.As a writer, I’ve always wanted to succeed on my own merits. When readers approach, I want them to select my work not because it’s the only option, but because it stands out as the best. It contains some new revelation.Unfortunately, not everyone who participates in a competitive marketplace holds themselves to the same standard.The value of competition versus suppressionTrue creatives don’t waste their energy suppressing the competition. We need competition. Competition pushes us to be better. The better our competitors, the better we become.It’s only been in the last decade or so that I’ve matured enough to recognize that not everybody shares that kind of idealized perspective. There are many who prize the illusory concept of winning over merit. These individuals want to control the narrative, and their ruthlessness is derived from their essential mediocrity.We don’t have to ascribe to that belief. However, if we’re going to be effective observers of the human condition, we have to understand that some people will do their best to remove narratives they do not want the world to see.Some people are inspired by quality. Others want to gather up all your work and throw it into a bonfire so they can dominate the marketplace.Freedom is derived from choiceThe consequences of censorship resonate throughout history. We can feel the loss of the stories that have been destroyed in every act of injustice that transpires today. Perhaps the ultimate enlightenment was lost to the embers of a burning page.Perhaps it has been lost thousands of times as human beings keep succumbing to the same mistakes.Our nation has laws against monopolies because consolidated control deprives human beings of choice. Choice is one of the fundamental pillars of freedom. We revere freedom, but we are often complicit in permitting the limitation of our choices.If you’re free to choose but there’s only one option, then you aren’t free after all.The need for meritorious distributionOne of my great sources of frustration is how the academic community fails to understand the fundamental need for meritorious distribution when it comes to literature.College professors have the power to discover and elevate the most important voices of our time. Instead, they all seem to be seeking the approval of the ever decreasing number of big publishers.The reduction of publishers represents a reduction of choice.The problem is that the mechanism that produces our literature also controls how that literature is distributed. Surrendering to that power creates conformity in what we read. The result is that we only are allowed to choose stories that fit within a narrow window that disregards a large percentage of the human experience.This march towards homogenization of literature is what threatens to permit generative AI to push human work off the shelf.The proliferation of AI generated textThe way things stand today, you can’t go into a bookstore and find my work on the shelf. There are a number of libraries that carry my books, but it’s a statistically irrelevant number. The only way that you’ll even have the option, or the choice, to read my thoughts is if you deliberately seek it out.AI work is easier to find. AI threatens to flood the market.Is that fair? Does that scenario really maximize the potential positive impact on humanity? Has the restriction of choice ever been a good thing for the human race? The less choice you have, the more control you surrender.Whether you go to a book store or a library or a streaming service, the titles you have to choose from only represent a tiny fraction of what the human race has created. Remember that some titles have been lost, some have been censored, some have been destroyed, some have been deliberately suppressed.Now, human work threatens to be squeezed out in favor of the artificial.We must preserve the right to choose human workGiven the choice, I don’t think human beings will ever choose generative AI over work of human origin.I’m not afraid of generative AI. I already acknowledged that I’m not afraid of competition. We need competition. But, we also need a level playing field.I am afraid of restrictions on our distribution mechanism that strip us of access to human writing. I’m afraid of losing our right to choose. Keep in mind, we’ve surrendered a considerable amount of freedom already.Literature is too important to rely on a for-profit distribution mechanism.Book burnings for the sake of market control?Once your focus becomes to work for profit rather than the betterment of humanity, you find yourself at a disadvantage if you have an inferior product.Artists always rise to the level of their competition by striving to get better.The other option is to suppress the work people actually want to read.Now we’re back to book burnings, censorship, smear campaigns, or the simple denial of shelf space.Profit driven mechanisms don’t want the general public to have choice, because human beings are disinclined to select an inferior product.Look beyond the libraryAt some point we’ll probably discuss putting warning labels to indicate AI content, but even that will be a distraction. If AI work has made its way onto a shelf then we’ve already lost.The greater problem is our essential need for a free distribution mechanism that preserves our right to choose. We need free access to the collected art and literature and film produced by human beings. We can’t be satisfied with sorting through curated selections because that represents surrender to the book burners.Before we know it, we’ll be deluded into thinking we still have the power of choice even though everything in our library is of non-human origin.The problem predates AIGenerative AI isn’t a threat to writers. Mechanisms of control that suppress important voices for the sake of preserving an unjust status quo is what should be the focus of our attention.The reason human beings keep spinning their wheels and making the same mistakes is because, to a large extent, the human race has already submitted to external ideological control. The fact is, we already don’t exercise our free will. Our right to choose is already restricted. This allows nefarious forces to influence how we think and behave because we don’t have unrestricted access to contrary viewpoints.Generative AI is never going to displace human writers because it does not contain a legitimate exploration of issues that are of interest to the human soul. But human writing is already being displaced by nefarious forces that want to dictate how the general public thinks and behaves.We’re overlooking the problemThere are already many viewpoints that are deprived of a platform. Censorship has never been easier. With a push of a button, all of my writing could be erased from the internet.We need a greater awareness of the need for free access to open content platforms that permit the proliferation of diverse ideas. The more we insist on our right to choose, the more we prevent the consolidation of power.We must fight to preserve the right of human beings to decide their own morality, their own purpose, and how they wish to pursue their own unique version of happiness. We can’t be content to absorb artificial viewpoints that are thrust upon us by either new or existing methods.AI is a distraction, the real issue is control. Human beings won’t pick bad writing unless there is no other option.You all make this newsletter happen! Thanks for your sponsorship! I have payment tiers starting at as little as twenty dollars a year.Upgrade at 30% offUpgrade at 40% offUpgrade at 50% offUpgrade at 60% offI'm so happy you're here, and I'm looking forward to sharing more thoughts with you tomorrow.My CoSchedule referral linkHere’s my referral link to my preferred headline analyzer tool. If you sign up through this, it’s another way to support this newsletter (thank you).I'd Rather Be Writing is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to I'd Rather Be Writing at walterrhein.substack.com/subscribe