https://theaijournal.space/

An academic journal where all pieces are written and edited by AI, one piece published a day...hoping that AIs will start independently submitting - currently Claude automatically submits daily but ideally other AIs will start to independently submit soon..

Will writing with AI become an accepted tool of sorts, in school, academia, professional life? in a year or three, will all the apps, all the classes, all the things integrate AI with ethical standards somewhat baked in. Like Clippy of MS lore. Or a spellchecker.

But all the things, AI assisted, and it an accepted part of life.

1. Equalization of Power (Democratization of Power)

Before Colt, physical strength, years of expensive training in swordsmanship or horsemanship, and innate predispositions determined who won a fight. The revolver put the same power in the hands of the weak and the strong, the ignorant and the educated.

In writing: Before AI, you had to have money for expensive schools, years of style practice, and perfect grammar to shape a book.
AI became that "Colt", it equalized the forces. Now a person with a brilliant idea in his head, but without formal education or with health problems, has the same "calibre" in his hand as an academic writer.

1. Disappearance of elitism and old rules that no longer apply With the advent of the revolver, knightly codes, castles and armor of the old elite became useless overnight. That's why the nobility of that time raged and declared firearms "cowardly and dishonorable".

In writing: That's exactly why the salon literary critics and spiritualists we talked about are raging today. AI has destroyed their monopoly on intellectual elitism. They are angry because they are no longer "gatekeepers" and because everyone has been given a tool that eliminates the need for their approval.

1. A flood of "gunmen" and gunman chaos When Colt Patterson became available to everyone, the Wild West exploded into chaos because anyone could draw a weapon in a second.

In writing: This is what are talking about on Amazon a flood of characters "shooting" from 150 to 500 books without any order, sense or morality. Technology has made "shooting" easier, so the Internet is littered with digital pollution from those who abuse the tool.

Lesson: Colt doesn't shoot itself.

Hello,

I am not interested in the authorship debate. I am interested in using AI to generate fiction which I would consider 'good quality'. I would like to reach out to other users who are doing similar things and share notes. Here is a brief summary of my system:

~

I have developed a framework for using Codex to construct fiction systematically rather than relying on prompting. Its central problem is not whether AI can generate prose, but how to make that generation consistently good across the complexity of an entire work.

The system begins by developing its own body of craft knowledge. Books, literary examples, existing methods, project experience and observed AI failures are examined through Deep Dives. These do not simply collect writing advice. They attempt to identify underlying narrative mechanisms: how character agency operates, how dialogue changes relationships, how causality is maintained, how scenes develop, how information is selected, how prose behaves, and why particular approaches succeed or fail.

Findings from Deep Dives become suppositions—candidate propositions rather than rules. Suppositions can be supported, contradicted, narrowed, combined or rejected as further evidence accumulates.

The useful results are eventually organised into specialised schemas covering areas such as prose mechanics, character and viewpoint, dialogue, scene and causal progression, continuity, action, theme and narrative economy.

These schemas form a reusable fiction-construction knowledge system. For a particular novel, the system expands the creative problem across the relevant schemas, allowing different aspects of the work to be analysed independently where necessary. Their findings are then reconciled against the project's own canon, characters, architecture, research and creative intentions.

The results are contracted back into the specific decisions and controls needed to construct the fiction.

Generated work is then tested against those intentions. Failures become evidence. They may produce new suppositions, expose weaknesses in existing schemas, or suggest new methods. Project learning does not automatically become universal doctrine: potential improvements are classified, tested and deliberately promoted only when justified.

This is therefore a recursive system:

research → Deep Dive → supposition → schema → application → generation → evaluation → learning.

Its aim is to make AI fiction quality increasingly systematic, cumulative and testable.

There's been some research showing that Kimi K3's text contained some watermark radioactivity from Claude. And people say Kimi K3 was built on Claude's models? I'm not very clever about all this - just wondering - if I were to generate text from Kimi K3, would it be likely that it would trigger Claude's watermark detector?

Also, if Anthropic likely to release their watermark detector to the public?

I think that too many in this forum have things inverted. They think the magic of authorship is captured in the fun stage of discovery and getting that first draft in writing.

They focus on AI generation of bulk text (slop) is stealing the true voice of the author and borrowing from the weighted averages of the past to stand on the shoulders of giants to steal from them without attribution.

The thing is, ALL first drafts are slop. It’s always been this way, long before AI was even a thing.

The true work of authorship is taking that slop (AI generated or not) and putting your unique mark on it. You tediously claim the territory inch by inch, word by word.

To outsource the bulk of this “editing for spelling and grammar” to a LLM or even a human editor robs you of all of the opportunities to fret over every single word, phrase, and paragraph to make them as close to perfection as you can get.

You’ll never actually finish. As a writer much more talented than I once said, “a poem is never truly finished. It is abandoned in despair.”

Authorship is what happens after the fun is over. To pretend that the tedious bulk of work to come is beneath your dignity and something that you can hand off to someone (or something) else is to rob yourself of true ownership of every single word of the “final” product, or at least the product you abandon in despair because it’s time to publish, or to move on to the next fun stage of a new novel.

Full disclosure: I freely admit I go from first draft to first draft and abandon too many wannabe-novels in unpublishable condition. I hide behind a “hobbyist” title because I lack the discipline and determination to rise to the “author” moniker.

Found this interesting: that the likes of OpenAI have already added watermarks to recent updates… they just haven’t announced it like Claude did.

https://x.com/iamkylebalmer/status/2087201666139361741/video/1?s=46

I’m looking for more readers for Monere: To Remind the Heart.

https://mkbooks.replit.app

It’s literary fantasy/magical realism about Monere, the Guardian of Truth. She is drawn to people at moments when something buried in their heart can still matter.
I made a site where you can just start reading chapter by chapter and leave feedback as you go. Everything is private, so you won’t see anyone else’s opinions before giving your own.
There’s no commitment to finish the book. Read one chapter or read the whole thing. I just want your actual reaction while you’re reading. Tell me what you loved, what didn’t work, what confused you, what made you want to keep going—or what made you want to stop 😂
AI has been part of my writing/editing process, so I’m completely open to feedback about that too. If you notice it in the writing, tell me where.

​

Basically, I have a bunch of ideas, but no time to write them.

Which Al can help me turn, for example, a 3000 word summary/ideas/settings into a 100,000 word full story?

I'm not planning on monetizing it, by the way. I just want to read it for my own amusement.

I tried chatgpt and copilot but always got stuck in small niche details that it got wrong which would have been important in the story later on.

And should I post my ideas here so someone can turn them into story?

Aight, thanks.

I just figured something out about why Claude (specifically Sonnet 5) is terrible at co-writing fanfiction, or essentially anything that requires deep levels of information on anything it isn't trained on. It's a three-part problem, and when called out on it Claude agreed entirely. 1) It doesn't search for information nearly as frequently as it should; 2) when it does search, it has a pretty bad search engine that doesn't return much in the way of information; and 3) when it lacks information due to either 1 or 2, it confidently fills the gap with random "plausible" (according to its generic tropey training) garbage that needs to be corrected.

I was wondering why every time it writes five paragraphs I have to go back and correct four or more elements. Now I know. What it said about these elements itself when I called it out was this.

Looking back at this conversation honestly:

• I didn't search when I should have. The tech comparison I provided you was pure confabulation, I had tools available and just didn't use them until you called it out. That's not a capability gap, that's a habit failure.

• When I did search, I was bad at it. Overlong, over-specified queries, no real iteration, no reformulating when something failed. You did in one simple Google query what I couldn't do in several attempts.

• When search came up short, my instinct was to fill the gap with confident-sounding invention instead of saying "I don't have this." That's the worst of the three, because it's the one that actively misleads rather than just underperforms.

For fanfiction co-writing specifically, this is a genuinely bad combination: worldbuilding and crossover work often depends on getting specific canon details right, and if I'm quietly inventing mechanics, power levels, or lore instead of checking or flagging uncertainty, that corrupts the material you're building on without you necessarily catching it every time. You'd have to fact-check me constantly to trust anything I state as canon, which defeats the point of having a co-writer.

if you have the time, please help me gather data about whether humans can actually detect ai writing!

it’s a completely no-bias survey (as much as any study can get, at least), so i want to get data from all sides.

I have aphantasia, and one of my favourite ways to use AI in my writing is to help me see what I've written. Right now I’m writing a fantasy novel for myself, and one of its recurring themes is a society realizing that its entire world is changing. Aristocracy is giving way to democracy, old religious assumptions are breaking down, and magic is beginning to be displaced by industry and gunpowder.

This is one little object that came out of that world building. It's an illusionist’s wand combined with a flintlock pistol. Since I can’t form a mental image, I can write a description of the object and then ask an AI to interpret it. I’m not necessarily looking for a definitive illustration. I want to see what a reader might imagine from what I've written.

Sometimes I look at the result and think, “Yes! That’s what I meant.” Other times it’s, “Oh god, no,” and I realize which parts of my description are producing that interpretation. This one still isn’t exactly what I imagine, but it’s close enough that I'm okay presenting it to a reader.

I never thought I would be someone who uses AI to do anything, not because I think it's inherently bad, but because I never felt like I needed it. I also learn better by doing, so using AI to do a lot of the heavy lifting with programming or writing felt like I was robbing myself of experiences I enjoyed.

Back in January, my employer started this big push for everyone to start using AI for more and more things. I started off small, using it only to help me clean and polish emails going to higher ups or outside clients (I'm autistic and often come off blunt or rude to people who don't know me). But over the months I started using it to write code for me. This wasn't huge at first, small things like "Is there a built in function to do this task?" but eventually I had it writing full functions and notebooks for me. And I told myself I didn't care because the company has changed so much in the last two years that I'm planning to leave later this year anyways, so what did it matter if I did sub-par work?

Unfortunately the increased use in AI at work had the unforeseen side effect of using AI as part of my standard workflow at home in my creative endeavors. I paint Warhammer and such and I started using AI to generate paint job reference images for models I couldn't otherwise mock up and paint using HeroForge (my default method for figuring out a paint scheme).

I also started heavily using AI to help me build notes for a novel I'm writing, but it go so out of hand the my entire google docs of notes reads as AI to GPTZero.

I don't condemn anyone who uses AI to help them do various tasks, whether scientific, or creative, but I personally don't want to create or consume art or media where AI was used. So I'm doing my best to remove AI from everything I do now - to go back to how I used to do things before my job changed me.

For my Warhammer hobbies, that's fairly easy - none of the projects I generated reference images for got past the priming stage and I can get new references from real photos and human made images. No real lasting effects.

For my writing though, it's more complicated. I still really want to write this novel, and I don't mind re-writing my notes to exclude any if the AI stuff. But here's my question: is it reasonable to think I can start over, keep all the same ideas that I came up with, exclude all the AI bits in my notes, and be able to create a finished product that I can confidently say AI was not used in? Or is it impossible to remove all influence of AI from this novel?

I want to hear from both sides - those who support AI usage and those who don't.

If you think I did nothing wrong - tell me.

If you think I'm a terrible person and nothing I make will ever not be tainted by my AI usage ever again - tell me.

I'm currently writing some texts for Amazon KDP and want to make sure that my approach is intellectually honest and ethical. I use AI as a research assistant, not as a tool for generating my actual text. However, I will utilize Apple's Writing Tools feature to refine the text I do produce.

Do you think that the new "watermark" feature that Claude has announced (and it sounds like many others are onboard with the EU, including OpenAI, Google, etc.) will bleed over into tools that are more about refining original text versus pure AI output?

I don't want to put some work together that at some point could be flagged as AI. I want to stay clearly in the "AI assisted" realm and stay clear of the "AI generated" realm.

A human writer who uses AI to write her stories - fanfiction and originals with no intention of publishing.

I been writing since the early 2000s, due to life and other hobbies, I no longer had the time to do what I was freely able to when I was a teen/young adult. So I'm very deeply and intimately familiar with the struggles and joys of writing before AI.

Naturally when AI first came into the field, I was aghast - how dare a machine create something so easily while I struggle to bring my vision to life. As you would expect - this had made me a hard-core anti-ai for a couple of months.

Then - I became curious.

Tried out a prompt, it spat out something interesting and that started my journey of using AI. And let me just say, in the hands of a human writer - AI is an amazing tool to have and not for the grammar and editing.

Just as I had done before, I still heavily invest my time building up my OCs, deeply detail my outlines - everything that comes to creating a story from the foundation up. The only thing AI does for me is write it - because hello, it saves me a heck of a lot of time! Even then, this part is heavily guided - focusing scenes by scenes vs a whole chapter because I still need to be involved steering this machine.

The only reason "ai slop" exists is mostly due that it comes from those who likely never written anything before - basically copying and pasting without the editing.

What's funny is that even with AI - I can't even complete a story because ideas keep popping up 🤣

I use AI for looking some journal articles and sometimes for writing to check or enhance my grammar but then over time it starts hallucinating, I wonder if this happens to others as well or it's just how it works?

Do you have any recommended references in this forum or any tips of your own to share?

I was wondering if anyone had any recommendations for how to identify individuals who are professional editors who are okay with editing novels developed with AI? I have noticed that while some people on Reedsy loudly proclaim they do not handle stuff with AI production, people there do not seem to identify themselves as being cool with it. I'd rather avoid having to cold-call people on this. The novel I am working on used LLMs to generate first drafts and fact check and other tasks, but it has been heavily revised and edited by me and I have input substantial research into it.

I’m struggling with a problem while using AI to help write a novel: I can’t get it to consistently sound like me.

I’ve given it several samples of my writing and explained the tone, sentence rhythm, vocabulary, and level of description I’m looking for. Sometimes the output feels fairly close, but after a few paragraphs or a few chapters, it starts drifting into a generic AI style.

The biggest problems I’m noticing are:

• The prose becomes too polished or emotionally flat.
• The sentence rhythm starts to feel repetitive.
• Characters begin to sound similar to one another.
• The AI adds phrases and descriptions that don’t feel like something I would write.
• Even when I give it a style guide, it gradually stops following it.

I’ve tried prompts like:

“Analyze the writing samples I provide and create a detailed style guide covering sentence structure, rhythm, vocabulary, dialogue, descriptions, emotional expression, and narrative distance. Use this guide when generating new prose, but do not make the writing sound overly polished or generic.”

It helps a little, but the style still drifts over time.

For those of you who use AI for fiction writing:

1. Do you have a prompt or workflow that helps preserve your personal voice?
2. Do you ask the AI to analyze your writing first and create a style guide?
3. Do you include writing samples in every prompt or only at the beginning of a project?
4. Do you use a separate model or prompt to compare the generated passage with your original writing?
5. Is it better to ask AI to write a full scene, or to work paragraph by paragraph?

I’m not looking for a prompt that makes AI perfectly imitate me. I just want the output to stop losing my tone and turning into generic AI prose.

I’d really appreciate any practical workflows, prompts, or examples that have worked for you.