NaNoWriMo Is In Disarray After Organizers Defend AI Writing Tools ...
Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!
The Debate
While they're at it, why not make sport less ableist by allowing weaker athletes to take drugs to level the playing field. Actually, some sports do have weight classes so you don't end up with the biggest muscle-bound testosterone factory on two legs mopping the floor with opponents half their size. Not sure how a similar strategy could be applied to judging writing, though.
It would be interesting to have a section in the bookstore that says "Good writers" and another section that says "Just OK writers" and then a 3rd section that says "Honestly shitty writers here". I think that's what the clearance section is for. Where to put Stephen King? 
In literary circles, SK isn't generally regarded as all that great. His use of words just isn't "good" enough, he leaves plot holes or other missteps which could be avoided, etc etc. But what he does is tells good stories that ordinary people want to read and can somehow relate to or understand. So it's tricky to know if he's a "just okay writer" or a "good writer" - it depends on who the experts are that are deciding where to put the books on the shelves.
The Controversy
Then again, these days, in Best of the jokes, but unless you know how much AI contributed to each book, how can you allocate credit or blame to the so-called authors to figure out which section they're in? 
Me? As a retired professional editor, I think the editors deserve much more blame or credit than they're getting. As professional editors go extinct? The few surviving editors will soon die from AI-generated overwork...
NaNoWriMo isn’t a competition like that. The goal is just to write 50k words. You’re up against your own procrastination, competing time commitments, self-doubt, etc. To paraphrase Steven Pressfield, you’re up against the Resistance.
The Verdict
If I squint hard enough, I can see the line of thinking that led to the organizers’ stance. Nano is ultimately an exercise in self-actualization and achievement. If a tool helps a person cross the finishing line, it should be embraced by those who need it. 
But that’s a lot of squinting needed on my part. Nano is a writing exercise. A tool that allows you to write less is fundamentally antithetical to its mission, and accusing detractors of being -ists is a naked attempt to stifle any dissent.
Worse, LLMs are composed of public speech, almost none of which was gathered without permission. In many cases, the original posters of that information would have declined permission. And, of course, some of that data is copyrighted material and exists in what can charitably be called a legal and ethical gray area.
It’s hard to imagine a community that would be less receptive to allowing LLMs into the competition. This stance by the organizers is such a baffling display of misunderstanding their audience, it’s almost breathtaking. 
Luckily for all prospective writers, there’s nothing irreplaceable about NaNoWriMo, the organization. The organization is the definition of inessential. You want to write a novel? Go for it. You don’t need them. You never did and never will.
