Hi there. I’m noticing much more conversation around fiction writers’ use of large-language models (LLMs, colloquially referred to as generative artificial intelligence [AI] even though that’s just marketing and we haven’t actually created AI yet). Specifically, we live in a murky time, and readers question whether writers use AI. Writers are having to show receipts to prove they wrote what they wrote, and it’s not only affecting their reputation but also their livelihoods, since publishing companies are companies and (at least for the time being) don’t want to work with writers who use generative AI because (at least for the time being) it’s unpopular and makes them vulnerable to litigation.

That is bananas.

But I get it. The companies that created generative AI were really stupid, reckless, and irresponsible, and they have not, as yet, provided any tools or resources to reliably determine the content their products generate was, in fact, generated by those products. That has left us honest folks with little recourse to determine what is AI and what is human.

So as part of an effort to assure any future readers of my writing, including agents, editors, publishers, et al. who may be interested in working with me, let me simply attest here that

I never have and never will use generative AI or LLMs to create any part of any creative project.

My creative work is and always will be 100-percent human.

For posterity, here’s a link to my blogs on the matter. I think it’s important for writers to keep speaking out publicly against generative AI to establish a record of being pro-human to offer reasonable assurance that we’re earnest, authentic, and ethical.

This is a living page. I’ll amend and add to it as is necessary, but if you’re reading it, it’s current, and you can hold me to the commitments I’ve made.

But why are you pro-human artistry?

Frankly, that’s a weird question to ask, but generative AI:

• Is plagiarism
• Is the biggest theft of wealth and property in history
• Can only synthesize; cannot create
• Requires a ton of resources to do the work its user can do
• Harms local communities, which are disproportionately less affluent and diverse
• Is lazy
• Exposes users and whomever they work with to legal vulnerabilities
• Steals ownership of anything it creates, which means anything a user uses generative AI to create is, by definition, not theirs
• Atrophies creativity
• Steals opportunities for creativity to flourish
• Steals opportunities to own breakthroughs
• Steals the fun
• Is so obviously an attempt to corporatize our very intelligence and skills so we have to pay companies in the future to be productive
• Will be the death of human artistry if we don’t reject it