Books by People – Defending Organic Literature in an AI World

Capitalism, Profit, and the AI Book Flood

• Several comments link the surge of AI-generated books to capitalist incentives: cheap to produce, potentially profitable, little regard for harm or quality.
• Others push back that “greed” and technological progress predate capitalism and that non-capitalist or state-capitalist systems (e.g., China) also produce AI.
• There is partial agreement that current capitalist structures incentivize exploitative, low-quality mass production, including AI “slop.”

Value and Credibility of “Organic Literature” Certification

• Many are sympathetic to the desire for “organic literature” and like the term; they see a real market for human-authored work.
• However, the specific certification scheme here is widely viewed as unenforceable and potentially rent‑seeking: publishers can self‑certify, and the certifier has no real technical means to verify.
• Some mock it as a grift or “gold star” business with no added trust.

Can Human Authorship Be Proven?

• Ideas floated: recording the entire writing process, cryptographic timestamps, dedicated authoring devices, signed outputs (analogous to camera schemes), blockchain jokes.
• Multiple replies argue these are DRM-like, easy to game, burdensome for honest authors, and still don’t prove AI wasn’t used for ideas, plotting, or partial drafting.
• Consensus from several angles: ultimate proof is impossible; trust, reputation, and social context matter more than technical mechanisms.

Impact on Authors, Publishers, and Discovery

• Indie authors report multi‑year efforts for a single novel competing against AI-generated books produced in hours and pushed into marketplaces like Kindle.
• Some say this may be the “final nail” for non‑established authors; marketing and platform algorithms already dominate discoverability, and AI worsens the noise.
• Others expect reputable publishers and imprints to become more important as trust filters in a slop‑filled environment.

Reader Responses and Filtering Strategies

• Some plan to avoid modern fiction entirely and focus on pre‑1970 or pre‑2010 works, arguing that time and canonization are effective filters.
• Others strongly object, insisting contemporary literature still has “Steinbeck‑level” quality and that awards, reviews, and ratings (e.g., high‑review modern novels) remain good guides.
• Suggestions include: relying on word of mouth, known authors, trusted publishers, libraries, used bookstores, and non‑Amazon retailers like Bookshop or Kobo.

Quality, Meaning, and Ethics of AI‑Written Books

• Many describe AI prose as shallow, repetitive, and theme‑hammering; they avoid it for the same reason they avoid certain formulaic non‑AI authors.
• One stance: if a trusted human editor/curator vouches for an AI‑generated work, that person effectively becomes the “author,” and the book might be worth reading.
• Others argue authorship matters beyond entertainment: books shape morality and worldview, and AI‑optimized-for‑engagement texts may carry opaque, system‑level values.
• There’s concern that mass‑market optimization—already present in human publishing—will be “turbocharged” by AI trained on sales and engagement data.

Labeling and Regulation Debates

• Some want AI‑generated books labeled, even with cigarette‑like warnings; others say comparisons to cigarettes are hyperbolic and demand clear evidence of concrete harm.
• A counter‑proposal: voluntary “AI‑free” labels may be more workable than enforcing labels on all AI‑assisted works.
• Thread references Kindle’s current internal AI‑use disclosures as a partial step, though they don’t yet reach readers.

Copyright, Royalties, and “Scale” Arguments

• One line of discussion advocates royalty systems where AI companies or commercial users pay authors whenever their works contribute to training or outputs.
• Others compare LLMs to search or vector databases and argue end‑users, not model providers, should bear infringement liability.
• There’s an extended back‑and‑forth over whether “scale” justifies different legal treatment: some say society already regulates large‑scale behavior differently; others insist on consistent rules for humans and machines.
• A detailed proposal appears for revamped copyright: a short automatic term, optional registration into government‑managed training sets, licensing revenue back to authors, and structured weakening of rights over time.

Cultural Pessimism vs Optimism

• Several commenters express deep pessimism: fiction and film feel increasingly mediocre and market‑driven; AI will accelerate homogenization and reduce serious, labor‑intensive work to an elite hobby.
• Others push back, arguing that plenty of high‑quality contemporary literature and film exists; the main problems are discoverability and personal jadedness, not an absolute decline in artistic merit.