Speaker 1: Kathy let wonderful to have you on the show. What
Speaker 1: did you think when you saw that this book, Shy
Speaker 1: Girl had been pulled from shelves in the UK and
Speaker 1: the US.
Speaker 2: Well, it's absolutely thrilled, because you know, we ghost writers
Speaker 2: are bad enough, you know, all the celebrities who put
Speaker 2: a novel out pretending that they've written it when they've
Speaker 2: been created and crafted by real writers. But a machine
Speaker 2: written novel is a whole other level of fraud to me.
Speaker 2: So yeah, I was really thrilled.
Speaker 1: Readers were the first to raise the alarm.
Speaker 3: It's so empty. It's flat in every way, themes, characters,
Speaker 3: plot rating. And that is because, in my opinion, large
Speaker 3: chunks of this book were written with assistance from a
Speaker 3: generative AI, and generative AI does not think, or feel
Speaker 3: or have opinions.
Speaker 1: Now, horror novel Shy Girl has become the first book
Speaker 1: to be canceled over suspicions IO was used in large
Speaker 1: portions of the writing. According to The New York Times
Speaker 1: earlier this year, results from an AI detection program indicated
Speaker 1: that the book always get this seventy eight percent AI
Speaker 1: generated the publisher. So what are the implications for writers
Speaker 1: for readers and for the publishing industry as AI seeps
Speaker 1: into new and frightening corners of our creative industries. I'm
Speaker 1: Daniel James, and you're listening to seven AM today. I Beloved.
Speaker 1: I was the author. Kathy led on how AI slot
Speaker 1: is threatening the future of young writers and how to
Speaker 1: protect our art from the onslaught of bots. It's Friday,
Speaker 1: April three. Kathy, it took readers making AI accusations about
Speaker 1: Shy Girl before the publisher's cottoned on. This clip from
Speaker 1: YouTube of Frankie Shelf wracked up over a million views
Speaker 1: earlier this year.
Speaker 3: Is that it's a feeling. It is an unshakable feeling
Speaker 3: that a person would not rate like that. And again
Speaker 3: I haven't brought.
Speaker 1: Up if you reckon you would be able to spot
Speaker 1: an AI written book yourself.
Speaker 2: I think I would. Yeah. I mean it's a bit
Speaker 2: like when you taste margarine and you think that's not butter,
Speaker 2: or you know, when you taste it in that awful
Speaker 2: vegan kind of carb free carib chocolate, you think that's
Speaker 2: not chocolate. Well, they're non alcoholic wine. That's not a
Speaker 2: good pino. I mean, I think I could taste the authenticity,
Speaker 2: but you know, more gullible readers may not. So yeah,
Speaker 2: we've got to call these people out. I think though,
Speaker 2: there is a great novel to be written about an
Speaker 2: also who writes a book with AI thinking they're going
Speaker 2: to get away with it and they get caught. I
Speaker 2: don't know if you read Yellow Face, which was about
Speaker 2: an author.
Speaker 1: No, but I do actually have any of my collection
Speaker 1: that I'm going to read it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a good premise of an author stealing the
Speaker 2: work of her dead friend. So this could become like
Speaker 2: a really in joke if the author who's been caught
Speaker 2: out in this scam now writes a novel about what
Speaker 2: that was like.
Speaker 1: Actually, that's a good way of thinking about AIS our
Speaker 1: dead friends exactly.
Speaker 2: That's right.
Speaker 1: Well, should point out that the author, Mea. Ballard, has
Speaker 1: denied using AI to write the book, but says an
Speaker 1: acquaintance she hired to edit the novel did hughes AI. Now,
Speaker 1: she says her name is being ruled. Should there be
Speaker 1: more checks and balances from publishers and from authors to
Speaker 1: ensure something like this doesn't happen?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, first of all, I don't quite believe
Speaker 2: her excuse, because if you hire someone to edit your work,
Speaker 2: they're usually trimming it. No author whatever allows someone us
Speaker 2: to write a real also wouldn't allow someone us to
Speaker 2: write their work for them. I mean, I think it's
Speaker 2: impossible also not to have all work and no plagiarism.
Speaker 2: You know, we do borrow things. I mean, Bridget jones
Speaker 2: diary was the whole plot was borrowed from Bride and Prejudice.
Speaker 2: You know, Steve bry wrote a really great update of
Speaker 2: the Count of Monte Cristo. I mean, and if I
Speaker 2: overhear a conversation at dinner, you know, will I will
Speaker 2: use it and write it up in my book. So
Speaker 2: we do borrow. But to let AI write your whole
Speaker 2: novel and not to admit it is a borrowing too far.
Speaker 1: And it's also at the point now where a lot
Speaker 1: of software programs that you use, whether it's Microsoft Word
Speaker 1: or Google Docs, have AI assistance that can prompt you
Speaker 1: to sort of condense like a three word passage if
Speaker 1: you want to. Is it getting almost impossible for authors
Speaker 1: to not have at least a fingerprint of AI in
Speaker 1: their work.
Speaker 2: Well, I think I would say to most two authors,
Speaker 2: don't ever put your work into AI, because then you
Speaker 2: are feeding the machine. You're adding to the engine, So
Speaker 2: you have to absolutely resist the temptation to use AI
Speaker 2: in that way.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the US and UK have both brought in a
Speaker 1: kind of certification process. We can verify that your book
Speaker 1: is written by human and get a logo on the cover,
Speaker 1: kind of like the Australian made tick. How far does
Speaker 1: that go to ensuring authenticity?
Speaker 2: I think that is going to help a lot. You know,
Speaker 2: we put we've said the food that we're eating. They
Speaker 2: always have to read it exactly how many calories and
Speaker 2: how much sugar and that kind of thing. I think
Speaker 2: we should know what we're consuming intellectually, you know, if
Speaker 2: it's nourishing or not. So yeah, I think we should
Speaker 2: pay alsos the same respect as we do food products.
Speaker 2: I mean, what is there to say about AI, especially
Speaker 2: when it can say everything for us? But then again
Speaker 2: can it really You know, what AI says is not
Speaker 2: original nor unique, and that's what writers are for. I mean,
Speaker 2: AI can copycat, but it can't create, which is why
Speaker 2: AI firms have to be legally bound to tell copyright
Speaker 2: owners which of our individual works they've gobbled up to
Speaker 2: feed their ravenous data machine. I mean, copyright is a
Speaker 2: writer lifeblood, as you know, which is why artificial intelligence
Speaker 2: companies must not be allowed to use copyright protected work
Speaker 2: without permission. I mean, it's stealing for goodness sake. I
Speaker 2: know we're comvic stock, but you know, please don't steal
Speaker 2: our ideas. That's all we've.
Speaker 1: Got coming up is the Australian government moving fast enough
Speaker 1: on AI, Kathie. The reason books like this one are
Speaker 1: able to slip through is because, on paper, AI is
Speaker 1: getting better at sort of deceiving people with its writing.
Speaker 1: And that's because companies like you said, like Anthropic and OpenAI,
Speaker 1: have ignored copyright law and news books written by authors
Speaker 1: like you and me too a lesser extent to train
Speaker 1: their programs. How damaging is that for the industry and
Speaker 1: for the next generation of writers.
Speaker 2: Look, I think it's absolutely vital the governments protect Australian's
Speaker 2: creativity from extinction by enshrining ownership of our work. Otherwise
Speaker 2: all our wondrous ossie artists will go the way of
Speaker 2: the Tasmanian tiger and the desert bandicoot and the capricorn
Speaker 2: rabbit rat and all those other rare and exotic species
Speaker 2: that have been said ADI lost forever. Don't write off
Speaker 2: our writers, you know, protect us, because you know society
Speaker 2: would certain be so much sadder without our wit and
Speaker 2: wisdom and our pith, that our perspicacity.
Speaker 1: Don't you think whatever that last word meant.
Speaker 2: Yes, perspecsidy means absolutely, very very sharp perception, which you
Speaker 2: have obviously love it.
Speaker 1: The Australian government is looking at overhauling copyright laws to
Speaker 1: force AI giants to disclose what content they're using to
Speaker 1: train their bots and so that it's easier for creatives
Speaker 1: to go after these companies. For conversation, it's also ruled
Speaker 1: out giving our companies free copyright exemption after Ossiatis spoke
Speaker 1: out at a Senate Estimates hearing last year.
Speaker 4: What we're talking about here is really quite simple. Some
Speaker 4: of the largest companies in the world are asking for
Speaker 4: handouts from the Australian government. They want access to Australian
Speaker 4: culture and creativity for free.
Speaker 1: We can have exciting AI investment and a booming tech
Speaker 1: sector without pillaging our culture and selling out our artists.
Speaker 1: We can't have. I don't think at the moment, you
Speaker 1: know AI understands what a lounge room in Shepherd and
Speaker 1: Victoria smells like, are these good steps? And do you
Speaker 1: think the government is moving fast enough to protect writers?
Speaker 2: No, they need to move much, much faster, because so
Speaker 2: is AI. I mean, I'm very good friends with Stephen Frye,
Speaker 2: who's an AI expert, and we discussed this a lot,
Speaker 2: you know, and I often send him lists of things
Speaker 2: AI can't do, you know, like limeerates, you know, that
Speaker 2: lovely feeling when you fall in love for the first time,
Speaker 2: that beautiful feeling. Limereates orgasms. Apparently it can't recreate orgasms
Speaker 2: when it's reading audiobooks and stuff. It can't do umpit farts.
Speaker 2: So I send him these lists of things that AI
Speaker 2: can't do, and he just always says to me, not yet.
Speaker 2: So you know, it's it's moving so quickly, learning so fast,
Speaker 2: and you know, Stephen thinks so overwhelming as well. He
Speaker 2: wants to get me a bracelet. We go both wear
Speaker 2: a bracelet that just says TGIO, thank God, I'm old.
Speaker 2: We won't have to deal with the fallout of AI
Speaker 2: for all that long. But for young writers, you know,
Speaker 2: it's a really it's a clear and present danger. He
Speaker 2: also says, not regulating AI is like not regulating nuclear power.
Speaker 2: You know, it has the power to be obviously, it
Speaker 2: has the potential to work for good, but it also
Speaker 2: could bring so much destruction.
Speaker 1: What would real protection look like to you, Kathy.
Speaker 2: Are not allowing AI to train on our work end
Speaker 2: of you know, we need a creative condom or something
Speaker 2: to protect us from their intrusion. So yeah, they just
Speaker 2: shouldn't be allowed to train our work and protect our copyright.
Speaker 1: And finally, how big a danger do you think AI
Speaker 1: is for writers? Does it put your job at risk?
Speaker 1: Or are there always going to be things humans can do,
Speaker 1: especially in the creating space and in the writing space
Speaker 1: that AI cannot well, As we.
Speaker 2: Said earlier, you know, it can't have an original or
Speaker 2: unique idea. It's just like a magpie pick, you know,
Speaker 2: it just takes from everybody else. But it is a danger.
Speaker 2: I mean it's a shame because you know, AI could actually,
Speaker 2: if it's regulated, it could be so helpful for all
Speaker 2: of us. But you know, it's a very powerful machine,
Speaker 2: but we need to build it ethically and fairly and
Speaker 2: protect our writers at the same time. I mean, things
Speaker 2: are going so fast and getting so out of control
Speaker 2: now I kind of want to go back to the
Speaker 2: days of quill and ink and carrier pigeons and smoke signals.
Speaker 2: There are things that we can trust and control.
Speaker 1: I'm actually seriously looking at getting myself to depend just
Speaker 1: to be part of the resistance.
Speaker 2: Well, I know, part of the resistance, that's right. I've
Speaker 2: gone back to writing letters to people long hand and
Speaker 2: actually posting them because you know, then it's just between
Speaker 2: me and the person receiving it. I don't worry of
Speaker 2: anything being stolen or copied or whatever. So yeah, we're
Speaker 2: definitely heading into very uncharted and treacherous waters. So yeah,
Speaker 2: all tight.
Speaker 1: Well, Kathy, thanks so much for your timing. Can expect
Speaker 1: my thank you note in the mail any day now.
Speaker 2: That's love you, and I'll send you back a smoke
Speaker 2: signal in return.
Speaker 1: Thanks.
Speaker 2: Bye.
Speaker 1: Seven Ams and Early Show from Solstice Media. It's made
Speaker 1: by Adigus Bastow, Ariel Richards, Chris dan Gate, Crystal Color,
Speaker 1: Nicole Johnston, Travis Evans, Zotonveecho, and Me Daniel James. Our
Speaker 1: theme music is by Ned Beckley and Josh Hogan of
Speaker 1: Envelope Poortier. Over a long weekend, we'll be bringing you
Speaker 1: more fresh episodes, including tomorrow's look at the budget. Dele
Speaker 1: know that the Labor government is facing voters want relief,
Speaker 1: the Reserve Bank wants restraint, and the Treasurer is stuck
Speaker 1: in the middle. See you there