Distributing AI generated content

[_Si_]

Howdy,

I've been working on a little project, and it includes predominantly AI generated content. As as result, Wargames Vault won't let me distribute through there with their new policy.

Wondered if anyone knew of an alternative marketplace that isn't currently blocking AI stuff? I'm actually trying to give the piece away for free, I just wanted the increased exposure of Wargames Vault. Somewhere beyond my site and a few forums posts to get it in front of more eyes, know what I mean?

Appreciate any thoughts you chaps might have,
Si

[ced1106]

Try this site!

https://freewargamesrules.fandom.com/wiki/Freewargamesrules_Wiki

[Daeothar]

Can't help you there I'm afraid, but out of curiosity; why would they block AI generated content? And why would you advertize the fact when you do use it?

[modelwarrior]

Can't help you there I'm afraid, but out of curiosity; why would they block AI generated content? And why would you advertize the fact when you do use it?

Read an article on the BBC yesterday about AI generated content is about to jumped on by solicitors because the AI is generating its content from other peoples images/work etc without consent .

[Daeothar]

Slippery slope I reckon. After all, what we call creativity is fed by everything we see, read and experience. How do you even police this, outside of outright plagiarism?

Don't get me wrong; I'm not a fan of AI generated content myself (I'm old-school and it feels like cheating to me), but I find it hard to fault AI for getting its 'inspiration' all over the web. How else would it be able to learn?

[Easy E]

Interesting choice. 

If the content is mechanical, rules mechanics can not be copywritten in the first place. 

If the content is art, that is still a TBD issue.

I am not an expert though, so do not take my advice at all.


Besides that, google Free wargame rules and you will find a few places you can still post.

[Easy E]

For those interested in the new Policy:

It looks like One Book Shelf- The largest place for distributing RPGs and other tabletop game content has updated their policy.  This will probably be the guide for most companies going forward until it all gets sorted out:

https://owenkcstephens.com/2022/09/07/the-current-onebookshelf-ai-art-policy/

Tool- and AI-Generated Images
The following policy applies only to titles listed by publishers on DriveThruRPG. Other sites and community programs are, for now, exempt from these rules.

3rd Party Tool-Generated Images

All product listings that feature art or maps generated using a tool or service designed to reduce or offset the artistic process (such as donjon, Inkarnate, or Dungeondraft) are required to utilize the Format > Creation Method > 3rd Party Tool-Made title filter, except in the following instances:

the tool uses only art assets that you have created by hand;
1. the art has undergone additional processing or modification post-generation (such as animating generated maps or tokens, painting and compositing over content, etc.); or
2. the product is expressly approved by OneBookShelf.
3. AI-Generated Images

All product listings that feature art created automatically by an AI-generation tool meant to bypass or replace human artistry, such as ArtBreeder, MidJourney, NightCafe, etc. are required to utilize the Format > Creation Method > AI-Generated title filter, except in the following instances:

1. the art has undergone significant processing/modification post-generation; or
2. the product is expressly approved by OneBookShelf.

Note for AI-Generated Stock Art

Titles containing any art rendered by AI-generated tools that are sold as “Stock Art” (under the Product Type > Publisher Resources filter) must also display the following statement in their product description:

This product contains assets that were, wholly or in part, procedurally generated with the aid of creative software(s) powered by machine learning.

Titles that do not comply are subject to removal from the marketplace. Repeat offenders may have their publishing permissions revoked.”

[_Si_]

Yup, that's it in a nutshell. I think they're worried creators will get drowned out by AI written stuff. Not sure how I feel about that, smacks of movie studios and record companies desperately trying to fight streaming, and we all know how that ended up. Quality should be the determining factor.

Originality is a different issue of course. When it comes to AI art I'm against using artists names in the prompt. If you want a piece of work in the style of Greg Rutkowski you should pay him for one. But then there must be thousands of artists out there either by intent or by inspiration who are already doing close facsimiles...

I think long term it'll come down to understanding of the tech. If I'm a good artist and I spend years studying Picasso and then can create my own original works in Picasso's style, that's not copyright breach. If the AI is learning what makes a Picasso a Picasso and applying that to say a picture of a cat (which it learned by studying what a cat is) then that's just exactly the same process, sped up. If it chops up lots of pieces of Picassos and re-assembles them as a cat then that's less ok.

Also I've found AI can't write rules on its own (yet), it makes a vague mess. But I've found you can actually use it as a writing partner, phrases like "what about it we did X instead of Y" will genuinely get results. It's uncanny in a lot of ways.

My piece isn't a ruleset, it's a magazine created totally by AI. Kind of wears it like a badge which makes policies like this problematic

I've gone ahead and posted it on my own site, but I'm going to look around for other places too.

https://www.gtazz.com/kambara/ if anyone wants to check it out.

It's intended as an experiment, not a serious piece of content. Creating it was great fun, a huge learning experience, and frequently staggering. If I decide to do an issue 2 then that'd be a collaboration between me and the AI working on articles together.

[paspas]

Hello _Si_

which page layout software did you use? Indesign?

Thanks

[ithoriel]

Fascinating stuff, thanks for posting this.

I've sent the link to your website to various friends and family members.

All a bit," I for one welcome our robot overlords" though. 
Though at my age I may not live to see the implementation of The Matrix! 

[Ben Waterhouse]

Apropos of this subject, a good friend of mine is a medical technical translator English/Swedish/Finnish. He is finding AI translations incorporating his work across his discipline. A very slippery slope.

[Easy E]

I have definitely used it as a writing partner, but it mostly spits out ideas, that if taken as is are tripe. 

It really needs a writer to polish the ideas up.  For now, that is!

Cool work with the magazine.  A friend of mine had the same idea, but did not get as far as you yet.

[_Si_]

Sorry guys, got the dreaded covid (still a thing apparently!) and didn't respond.

@paspas, I use Affinity Publisher 2. I've used InDesign a lot in the past, but couldn't face the subscription costs these days. This one did everything I needed it to and was pretty easy to use.

100% on the robot overlords thing. It's definitely best used as a tool right now, though who knows where we're going. It can't do genuine creativity though, so if you bring the spark and it can hit it with the standards of the genre, that feels like a lot of what writing is.

I've started poking around ideas for the second issue, and doing that one more as a collaboration, so using it to write a mordheim scenario for instance, then getting it to change things I didn't like, and finally just removing and rewriting chunks that didn't makes sense. Makes for much better content, but obviously a lot more work.

Either way it as a fun experiment, and I'm still playing with NightCafe every day creating fun AI images.

[Daeothar]

Then there is this new issue coming up, with publishers now fuming over the fact that the huge pile of written content that most AI programs use to learn contains works of established writers. And they of course want a piece of the pie because, as they state, AI will now copy the writing style of those well known writers and that's copyright infringement.

My take on this is that if that should be taken seriously, all human writers out there should pay divident to each and every writer they ever read a book from. Because everything we read will influence us in some way.

So if I read a lot of Stephen King, and I find myself having the ambition to write a book myself, it will have been influenced by mr. King's writings, consiously or not. Could I then be sued for copyright infringement? Could stephen King himself? Because I'm sure he's read his share of other people's work.

This process is actually part of how languages evolve and clamping down on writers will stagnate the evolution of (written) language. Taken to extreme, this train of thought will require people (and AI) to learn how to read and write, without ever reading anything ever written by anyone else. 'Here are your letters. No, sorry, we don't have any examples, just start writing already!'.

A bit like a company trying to hire a 21 y/o with 15 years of experience in marketing

Thoughts on this one?

[Pattus Magnus]

I have some, but they’re not closely enough linked to miniatures or gaming for me to want to discuss them on LAF.