The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
1–10 of 41 posts
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#2I have a lot of experience with "LLM voice" as well, and none of that sounds even remotely LLM-written.
The smoking gun for LLM-written text is when the text is a "linked list". It can only ever directly reference the previous thing. That's not the case here. And the latest Hunger Games book isn't yet another amazon-published slopfest. It's been through a couple of rounds of editing, at the very least.
I'm not saying RedditOP is completely off-kilter. There might be something to what he's saying. Maybe Suzanne Collins (the author of the book) has been consuming a lot of LLM-generated content. Or maybe she's just ahead of the curve and writing in a style that's likely to catch fire (no pun intended) [1].
[1]: Yes, I wrote this myself! And the entire reply!
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#3This is truly an abysmal revelation. I can't really put into words how horrified I am that actual real physical books are now getting AI slop enshitifcation.
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#4This is truly an abysmal revelation. I can't really put into words how horrified I am that actual real physical books are now getting AI slop enshitifcation.
There's nothing magic about physical books in a way that might protect them, and it's a terribly low-margin industry that's vulnerable to this kind of behavior.
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#5I have a lot of experience with "LLM voice" as well, and none of that sounds even remotely LLM-written. The smoking gun for LLM-written text is when the text is a "linked list". It can only ever directly reference the previous thing. That's not the case here. And the latest Hunger Games book isn't yet another amazon-published slopfest. It's been through a couple of rounds of editing, at the very least. I'm not saying…
> none of that sounds even remotely LLM-written.
Did we read the same extracts? The nonsensical actions and movements of the lovers in the entire train scene? The obnoxious call and response structure? The absurd comparison between a grandmother skin and a spiders web because "silk"?
> It can only ever directly reference the previous thing. That's not the case here. And the latest Hunger Games book isn't yet another amazon-published slopfest. It's been through a couple of rounds of editing, at the very least.
I don't agree with your assessment here, "the last thing" can be literally anything the user prompts. Are you suggesting that because none of the previous books in the series are written by AI, that's somehow an argument that the latest in the series can't be?
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#6This is truly an abysmal revelation. I can't really put into words how horrified I am that actual real physical books are now getting AI slop enshitifcation.
There's nothing magic about physical books in a way that might protect them, and it's a terribly low-margin industry that's vulnerable to this kind of behavior.
OK I'll rephrase, in place of book I will use "cultural anchor" which covers everything. The point remains that it is all under siege.
It’s one thing that the internet is full of slop now, but something about this feels deeply worse. It’s something that has for all of history involved real humans authors. Now it seems some human authors use AI an don’t even bother to check the results make sense.
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#7This is truly an abysmal revelation. I can't really put into words how horrified I am that actual real physical books are now getting AI slop enshitifcation.
There's nothing magic about physical books in a way that might protect them, and it's a terribly low-margin industry that's vulnerable to this kind of behavior.
Precisely this. Pop literature was already prone to plagiarism before AI because of the sheer volume of slush. "LLM co-authoring" is plagiarism run through the laundry.
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#8I have a lot of experience with "LLM voice" as well, and none of that sounds even remotely LLM-written. The smoking gun for LLM-written text is when the text is a "linked list". It can only ever directly reference the previous thing. That's not the case here. And the latest Hunger Games book isn't yet another amazon-published slopfest. It's been through a couple of rounds of editing, at the very least. I'm not saying…
I use AI for world and character-building in the RPG i DM, and this is for sure something an AI would write. AI i use professionally do like linked list, but when i ask it without a MCP, to "write" a character and its background, catchphrases and what he would do in 3-4 different situation, you'll get paragraph that suspiciously look like the first example.
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#9This is truly an abysmal revelation. I can't really put into words how horrified I am that actual real physical books are now getting AI slop enshitifcation.
It's already big in esoterism. A relative of mine was reading some book which upon closer inspection turned out to be a direct ChatGPT printout (yes with the prompts included).
Feels so wrong in physical book form.
Re: The latest Hunger Games novel may have been co-authored by AI
#10I have a lot of experience with "LLM voice" as well, and none of that sounds even remotely LLM-written. The smoking gun for LLM-written text is when the text is a "linked list". It can only ever directly reference the previous thing. That's not the case here. And the latest Hunger Games book isn't yet another amazon-published slopfest. It's been through a couple of rounds of editing, at the very least. I'm not saying…
> none of that sounds even remotely LLM-written. Did we read the same extracts? The nonsensical actions and movements of the lovers in the entire train scene? The obnoxious call and response structure? The absurd comparison between a grandmother skin and a spiders web because "silk"? > It can only ever directly reference the previous thing. That's not the case here. And the latest Hunger Games book isn't yet another…
Okay, first, I haven't read that book. I'm going off the cherrypicked examples in the OP.
If a LLM was indeed used, the output was likely massaged to a degree that wouldn't be immediately obvious.
Now, my 2c: Writing is sometimes atrocious and sometimes authors jam in stupid things to maintain flow. If a person could make the connection between "Silk", "Spider", "weaving" and "grandmother" then another person could as well (even when one is "verifying" and another "proving"). And using those properly and in context and succinctly is far beyond most LLMs, and would require a fair amount of gambling, which would be out of character for someone whose writing prowess has been verified pre-LLMs.
As for what I mean by "directly reference the previous thing": LLMs can jam in well-known (to them) phrases and sentences and structures onto an idea/request. However, they are unable to loop upon the particulars of that idea/request in a coherent manner, which leads to slopification at large output sizes, and shows us the ceiling of the quality of writing a LLM can output.