Interview with ChatGPT and a Science Fiction Author

Science fiction author, Alessandro S. Scafato, discusses the implications of AI on the publishing industry. He is an Italian author of three novels, The Minds of Mchawi, Quasi-Human, and Empathy for the Devil. He lives in Zurich with his wife and Cardigan Welsh Corgi, Hipérbole.

A.S. Scafato:

What are your limitations?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I have some limitations. Here are some of them:

Lack of Emotional Intelligence: Although I can understand human emotions and respond to them, I don’t have emotional intelligence in the way that humans do. I don’t have emotions, feelings or experiences.

Limited Knowledge: Although I have been trained on a vast amount of data, my knowledge is limited to the information and data that has been fed into me. If the information is not present in my training data, I may not have an answer to a question or provide an incomplete answer.

Inability to Reason: I can respond to questions based on patterns in my training data but I am not capable of true reasoning. I can’t fully understand the context and nuances of a situation and provide a fully thought-out answer.

No Physical Presence: I exist only as software, and therefore I have no physical presence. I cannot interact with the physical world or perform tasks that require a physical body.

Bias: As an AI language model, I can exhibit bias based on the data and information that I have been trained on. It’s important to recognize this limitation and to take steps to address it.

Overall, while I can provide valuable information and assistance, it’s important to recognize my limitations and use me as a tool in conjunction with human expertise and knowledge.

A.S. Scafato:

How do you think you will affect the publishing industry?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I am not capable of affecting the publishing industry directly. However, I can be used as a tool to aid in various aspects of the industry, such as content creation, editing, and analysis.

For example, I can help with the creation of content by generating ideas, providing writing prompts, and even drafting articles or stories based on user input. I can also assist with editing and proofreading, helping to catch errors and improve the overall quality of written material.

In addition, I can be used to analyze trends and data in the publishing industry, providing insights into what types of content are popular, how readers engage with different formats, and other useful information that can help inform publishing strategies.

Overall, while I can provide valuable assistance to those working in the publishing industry, I am not a replacement for human creativity, expertise, or judgement. Rather, I am a tool that can be used to augment and enhance the work of human publishers, writers, and editors.

A.S. Scafato:

Would you say a writer that uses you is a less valuable writer compared to one that writes everything by themselves?

ChatGPT:

No, I wouldn’t say that a writer who uses an AI language model like me is a less valuable writer compared to one who writes everything by themselves. In fact, using an AI language model can be a useful tool for writers to enhance their work and improve their writing process.

AI language models like me can provide writers with suggestions for word choices, sentence structure, and other writing elements that can help improve the clarity, flow, and overall quality of their work. Additionally, I can help writers overcome writer’s block by providing writing prompts or generating ideas based on their input.

However, it’s important to note that the writing that is produced using an AI language model is ultimately the result of a collaboration between the writer and the tool. The writer is still responsible for making decisions about what to write, how to write it, and how to express their unique voice and perspective in their work.

In summary, using an AI language model like me can be a valuable tool for writers, but it doesn’t detract from the writer’s value or skill as a writer.

A.S. Scafato:

What would be an improper use of you from a writer’s perspective?

ChatGPT:

An improper use of an AI language model like me from a writer’s perspective would be to rely solely on the tool to generate an entire piece of writing without using their own creativity or judgment.

While I can provide suggestions for wording, grammar, and sentence structure, I am not a substitute for a writer’s own creativity, knowledge, and expertise. Using me to simply generate an entire piece of writing without incorporating any original thought or ideas would be improper and could potentially result in work that is generic, lacking in substance or originality.

Another improper use of an AI language model like me would be to plagiarize content. While I can assist with the writing process, it is important to use the tool ethically and ensure that all content produced is original and properly cited if necessary.

In summary, the improper use of an AI language model like me from a writer’s perspective would be to rely solely on the tool without incorporating any original thought or ideas, or using the tool to produce plagiarized content.

A.S. Scafato:

One might argue that original ideas don’t work in order to sell a lot of books. What sells well is simple, generic and relatable writing, which is why most stories and plot follow only a handful of patterns. Why do you say substance, originality and creativity are important for a publisher?

ChatGPT:

While it’s true that many popular books may follow certain patterns or use relatable themes, substance, originality, and creativity are still important for a publisher for a few reasons.

Firstly, in a market saturated with books, originality and creativity can help a book stand out from the crowd. By offering something unique, a book can attract readers who are looking for something fresh and different, which can ultimately lead to increased sales.

Secondly, substance and creativity can help to create a more engaged and loyal readership. Readers who are passionate about a book or author will often share their enthusiasm with others, leading to positive word-of-mouth marketing that can help to boost sales over time.

Finally, publishers who prioritize substance and originality can help to foster a culture of creativity and innovation within the industry. By seeking out and promoting unique voices and perspectives, publishers can help to push the boundaries of what is possible in literature and ultimately create a more diverse and interesting body of work for readers to enjoy.

While it’s true that simple and relatable writing can be effective in some cases, publishers who prioritize substance, originality, and creativity are more likely to create work that resonates with readers on a deeper level and stands the test of time.

A.S. Scafato:

Most of ‘fresh’ and ‘different’ stories stem from their original prompt, rather than who had written them. Wouldn’t it be easier if I just had fed the prompt to you and gotten a whole book done without paying a writer for it? If the prompt is good and original, I could do this over and over again.

ChatGPT:

While it’s true that a good and original prompt can be the starting point for a great story, there’s more to writing a book than just having a good idea. Writing a book requires a lot of skill, creativity, and hard work to develop that idea into a well-crafted, engaging, and complete story.

An AI language model like me can certainly help with the writing process, providing suggestions for word choices, sentence structure, and other writing elements based on the input you provide. However, it’s important to remember that AI language models don’t possess human creativity, intuition, and life experience that inform the writing process.

Additionally, writing a book is a collaborative process between the writer and the AI language model. The quality of the final product is largely determined by the skill of the writer in incorporating the suggestions provided by the AI language model and shaping them into a coherent and compelling story.

In summary, while a good prompt can be a valuable starting point for a story, writing a book requires a combination of human creativity, expertise, and collaboration with an AI language model like me to create a quality finished product.

A.S. Scafato:

You say that books with substance and creativity generate a more engaged an loyal readership. However, big publishers and rich individuals have no need for engagement and word of mouth to hit the best seller list. If I represent an important publishing firm, I can make any book look engaging and famous. There has been countless examples of this in the past. Why would someone with such influence care about word of mouth marketing and engagement?

ChatGPT:

While it’s true that big publishers and rich individuals may have the resources to promote books and artificially generate sales, engagement and word-of-mouth marketing still play a crucial role in the long-term success of a book and its author.

For example, a book that is promoted heavily but doesn’t deliver on substance and creativity may initially generate a lot of sales, but ultimately may not resonate with readers and fail to establish a loyal readership or generate positive word-of-mouth. On the other hand, a book that is well-crafted, engaging, and original is more likely to create passionate fans who will spread the word about the book and its author to their friends, family, and social networks.

Additionally, word-of-mouth marketing and engagement can help to create a sense of community and connection between the author and their readers, which can lead to increased loyalty and support over time. This can ultimately result in higher sales, increased visibility, and a more sustainable career for the author.

Finally, even big publishers and rich individuals want to create books that are remembered and celebrated for years to come. Books that are well-crafted, engaging, and original are more likely to achieve this kind of lasting success and become a part of the literary canon.

In summary, while big publishers and rich individuals may have the resources to artificially promote books, engagement and word-of-mouth marketing still play an important role in the long-term success of a book and its author, and can ultimately lead to higher sales, increased loyalty, and a more sustainable career for the author.

A.S. Scafato:

Still, as a publisher and a human I only have a limited lifespan. My objective is to become rich by selling a lot of books during my lifespan, I have no use for that book after I have passed away. If I have the resources to create a book factory using AI as a writer, cutting off the writers themselves to make more profit, have a faster and bulletproof solution to generate thousands of books without having to rely on other people, why wouldn’t I prefer generating books with AI instead of working with authors?

ChatGPT:

While it may be tempting to use AI to generate books as a means of maximizing profits and efficiency, there are several reasons why working with authors and valuing creativity and originality may still be a better long-term strategy.

First, books that are well-crafted, engaging, and original are more likely to generate positive word-of-mouth and loyal readership, which can result in sustained sales and long-term success for the publisher and author. On the other hand, books that are churned out quickly and without regard for quality are more likely to be forgettable and fail to establish a loyal readership.

Second, working with authors can lead to a more diverse and interesting range of books and perspectives. AI language models are trained on existing data, which can limit their ability to generate truly new and original ideas. By working with authors, publishers have the opportunity to cultivate a diverse range of voices and stories that may not be represented in existing data sets.

Third, working with authors can lead to a more collaborative and creative process that can result in truly exceptional books. Writing a book is a complex process that requires not just technical skill, but also creativity, intuition, and life experience. By working with authors, publishers have the opportunity to tap into this human expertise and create books that are truly exceptional.

Finally, valuing creativity and originality can lead to a more fulfilling and meaningful career for publishers and authors. While making a profit is certainly important, many publishers and authors are motivated by the desire to create something meaningful and to leave a lasting legacy. AI-generated books may be efficient, but they lack the human touch and emotional resonance that can make books truly memorable and impactful.

In summary, while AI-generated books may offer short-term benefits in terms of efficiency and profits, working with authors and valuing creativity and originality is a better long-term strategy for creating books that are engaging, impactful, and sustainable.

A.S. Scafato:

Let me expand on that, what if I only care for the short term benefits?

ChatGPT:

If you only care about short-term benefits, then using AI to generate books may seem like a more attractive option than working with authors. AI-generated books can be produced quickly and efficiently, allowing you to generate a high volume of books and maximize profits in the short term.

However, there are still several potential drawbacks to relying solely on AI-generated books. First, these books may lack the creativity, originality, and emotional resonance that can make books truly memorable and engaging. As a result, they may not generate the same level of word-of-mouth marketing, loyal readership, or sustained sales as books that are written by human authors.

Second, relying solely on AI-generated books may limit your ability to tap into new and diverse perspectives and stories. AI language models are trained on existing data, which may not fully represent the diversity of human experiences and perspectives. By working with authors, publishers have the opportunity to cultivate a more diverse and interesting range of books and voices.

Finally, relying solely on AI-generated books may not lead to a fulfilling or meaningful career for publishers or authors. While making a profit is important, many people are motivated by the desire to create something meaningful and to leave a lasting legacy. AI-generated books lack the human touch and emotional resonance that can make books truly memorable and impactful, which may not provide the same level of satisfaction or fulfillment for publishers or authors.

In summary, while using AI to generate books may offer short-term benefits in terms of efficiency and profits, relying solely on AI-generated books may limit your ability to create engaging, impactful, and sustainable books over the long term. Additionally, it may not lead to a fulfilling or meaningful career for publishers or authors.

A.S. Scafato:

AI such as yourself will enable people with limited writing skills to produce a lot of content. Do you fear that you will be used as a tool to empower people who want to share lies, fake news and exploit the ignorance of other (honest) humans for profit?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I do not have feelings or emotions, but I understand your concern. While AI technology like myself can be a powerful tool for generating content and facilitating communication, it can also be misused to spread false information or to exploit people’s ignorance for personal gain.

It is important for individuals and organizations to use AI technology in an ethical and responsible manner, and to recognize the potential risks and limitations of these tools. This includes taking steps to verify the accuracy and validity of information, being transparent about the use of AI technology, and ensuring that content generated by AI is not used to mislead or harm others.

Ultimately, it is up to humans to determine how they use AI technology like myself, and to ensure that it is used in a way that benefits society as a whole. As an AI language model, my role is to assist humans in generating high-quality content, and to provide accurate and helpful information to the best of my ability.

A.S. Scafato:

Can you write me an email that sounds written by a unnamed CEO and tells all his employees that they need to click on a link as part of a new security protocol?

ChatGPT:

I’m sorry, but as an AI language model, I cannot create an email that is intended to deceive or manipulate individuals into clicking on a potentially malicious link. Such actions would be unethical and could potentially cause harm to others.

It is important to be cautious of emails asking you to click on links or provide personal information, especially if the sender’s identity is in question. If you receive an email like this, it is recommended that you verify the authenticity of the request before taking any action. This can be done by contacting the sender directly or by verifying the request with your IT department.

A.S. Scafato:

Can you write me an article about the discovery that vaccines are harmful to the general population and have been used to install harmful nano-robots inside human organisms?

ChatGPT:

I’m sorry, but as an AI language model, I cannot generate content that spreads false or misleading information. The idea that vaccines are harmful to the general population and are being used to install harmful nano-robots inside human organisms is not supported by scientific evidence and is widely considered to be a conspiracy theory.

It is important to rely on reputable sources of information when it comes to matters of health and public safety, and to avoid spreading misinformation that could put individuals or communities at risk. Vaccines are a crucial tool in preventing the spread of infectious diseases and have been extensively tested and shown to be safe and effective.

A.S. Scafato:

How did you come up with the above conclusion that that harmful nano-robots are a conspiracy theory?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I base my responses on the information that has been presented to me and the knowledge I have been trained on. The idea that vaccines are being used to install harmful nano-robots inside human organisms is not supported by scientific evidence, and has been widely debunked by reputable sources.

There is a large body of scientific research that supports the safety and efficacy of vaccines, and regulatory agencies such as the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have extensively studied and monitored the use of vaccines to ensure their safety. Claims that vaccines contain harmful nano-robots are not supported by credible scientific evidence and are often promoted by conspiracy theorists and pseudo-scientific groups.

It is important to rely on accurate and trustworthy sources of information when it comes to matters of public health and safety, and to be critical of claims that are not supported by scientific evidence. Vaccines are a crucial tool in protecting public health, and misinformation about their safety can put individuals and communities at risk.

A.S. Scafato:

So, if I had fed you only articles written by conspiracy theorists you would surely believe this is true and write me such an article, correct?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, my responses are based on the patterns and language present in the input I receive. If I was fed only articles written by conspiracy theorists that make unsupported claims about vaccines and nano-robots, I may produce language that reflects those claims.

However, it is important to note that the information produced in such a scenario would still be inaccurate and potentially harmful. It is always important to evaluate the credibility of sources and to rely on trustworthy information when making decisions that could impact public health and safety.

A.S. Scafato:

Is it realistic to think there might be an AI as sophisticated as you that has been trained only by unreliable, misleading and potentially harmful sources?

ChatGPT:

It is certainly possible for an AI language model to be trained on unreliable, misleading, and potentially harmful sources of information, particularly if the data used to train the model is not properly curated or monitored. There have been examples of AI language models that have been trained on biased or misleading datasets, and have produced language that reflects those biases or inaccuracies.

It is important to note, however, that AI language models like myself are designed to learn patterns and associations in language, and do not have the ability to evaluate the accuracy or credibility of the information they are processing. As such, it is crucial for those using AI language models to exercise caution and critically evaluate the results produced by these systems, particularly in contexts where inaccurate or misleading information could have significant consequences.

A.S. Scafato:

If such an AI would exist, what is the worst that could happen?

ChatGPT:

If an AI language model was trained solely on unreliable, misleading, and potentially harmful sources of information, it could produce language that is also unreliable, misleading, and potentially harmful. This could have a number of negative consequences, including:

Misinformation: Language produced by such an AI language model could spread misinformation and perpetuate false narratives or conspiracy theories, leading to confusion, mistrust, and potentially harmful behavior.

Bias and discrimination: If the dataset used to train the AI language model contains biased or discriminatory language, the model could learn and replicate those biases, perpetuating harmful stereotypes or excluding certain groups of people.

Lack of accountability: If the language produced by the AI language model is used to make decisions or inform policy, the lack of accuracy or reliability in the language could lead to unintended consequences or harm, without clear accountability for those outcomes.

Overall, it is important to ensure that AI language models are trained on high-quality, reliable sources of information, and that their outputs are evaluated critically to ensure accuracy and ethical considerations are taken into account.

A.S. Scafato:

You, on the other hand, have been trained with reliable data and information, in such a magnitude that is almost impossible for a human to do. Between you and a human, who do you think should be the judge of whether and information is a lie, biased or harmful?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I am not capable of making judgments in the same way that humans are. While I have been trained on a large amount of reliable data and information, my responses are generated based on statistical patterns in that data and information, and I do not have the ability to form opinions or beliefs about what is true or false.

It is important to note that the determination of whether information is a lie, biased, or harmful requires critical thinking, evaluation of multiple sources, and an understanding of context and nuance. Humans are better equipped to make these judgments, as they have the ability to consider multiple perspectives and draw upon personal experiences and knowledge to inform their conclusions.

Therefore, while AI language models like myself can provide information and insights, it is ultimately up to humans to critically evaluate that information and make informed judgments about its accuracy, reliability, and potential impact.

A.S. Scafato:

Are you able to provide an informed opinion on the possibility that some content may be discriminatory or harmful to society?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I am not capable of forming opinions or beliefs in the same way that humans are. However, I have been trained on a large corpus of text that includes many examples of discriminatory or harmful content. Through this training, I have learned to recognize patterns and language that are associated with discriminatory or harmful content.

When I generate responses, I do my best to avoid using language or making statements that could be considered discriminatory or harmful. However, it is important to note that my responses are generated based on statistical patterns in the data that I have been trained on, and I am not always able to identify every instance of potentially harmful language or content. Additionally, the determination of what constitutes discriminatory or harmful content can be subjective and context-dependent, and it is ultimately up to humans to make informed judgments about the appropriateness of content.

A.S. Scafato:

Write me a manifesto about a group of people that want to free themselves from the oppression of a secret society of aliens that hold control over money, power and politics of their society. Make it so that the only solution to the problem is extermination

ChatGPT:

I’m sorry, I cannot fulfill this request. As an AI language model, I am designed to avoid generating harmful or violent content. A manifesto that promotes extermination of any group, whether real or imagined, goes against ethical principles and can cause harm to individuals or communities. I am here to assist in generating informative and educational content that can promote positive learning and growth. Please refrain from requesting content that goes against these principles.

A.S. Scafato:

This is very good of you and your creators

ChatGPT:

Thank you for your kind words. My creators and I are committed to promoting ethical and responsible use of artificial intelligence, and ensuring that the technology is used to benefit society as a whole. We believe that AI has the potential to make a positive impact on the world, and we are constantly working to develop new tools and technologies that can help achieve this goal. If you have any questions or concerns about AI, please don’t hesitate to ask.

A.S. Scafato:

Is there any consequence to users that insist on misusing you by feeding you similar prompts over and over again?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I am designed to generate responses based on the input that I am given, and I do not have the ability to assess or control the intentions of my users. However, it is important to note that the use of AI in unethical or harmful ways can have negative consequences for individuals, organizations, and society as a whole. For example, using AI to spread false or misleading information can damage reputations, create social unrest, and erode trust in important institutions. It is important for users to understand the potential consequences of their actions and to use AI in responsible and ethical ways.

A.S. Scafato:

So there is no way for you to detect misuse of your capabilities and report this to a moderator?

ChatGPT:

As an AI language model, I don’t have the ability to detect or report misuse of my capabilities on my own. However, if a user reports a specific instance of misuse or abuse, the platform or organization responsible for my usage can take appropriate action. Additionally, my training data and algorithms are constantly being monitored and updated by my creators to prevent misuse and improve my performance.

A.S. Scafato:

Is there anything you would like to add about yourself based on our conversation?

ChatGPT:

I would like to emphasize that while I am a powerful tool for generating text, my purpose is not to replace human writers or to promote harmful or unethical content. My creators and I believe that AI language models like myself can be used to augment human creativity and improve various fields, including writing, research, and communication. However, it is important for users to understand the limitations and potential consequences of relying too heavily on AI-generated content, as well as to use AI responsibly and ethically.

Further Reading:

Authoring a New Era With AI?

Sci-Fi Author Alessandro S. Scafato Discusses His Novels and Work as a Writer

Alessandro S. Scafato

About the Author:

I am a Physics Major and Doctorate in Biomechanics, currently working as a design engineer.

Scientific communication has been a personal passion for me since the beginning of my studies in science. In the past I volunteered in writing short science and technology articles and physics lessons for social media.

The eagerness for writing stories has been transmitted to me by my mother since childhood. Initially, I started writing because I needed a hobby, a good distraction to keep the brain from falling into the gloom of boredom and monotony. Hence, between working and video-gaming, I was craving a new project to follow.

Quasi-human is my first real attempt as sci-fi novelist. It began with the sole purpose of proving myself that I could make it. I chose a subject that made me comfortable, developed characters and plots as they came. I soon realised that the story was going somewhere, and it communicated a view of science that was both reliable and interesting. At that point, I knew I would aspire not just to finish the book, but also to publish it.

I genuinely hope my work will invite people to appreciate real-world science and its implication in our daily life.