AI is changing the world. Don't stay behind. Clear summaries, community insight, delivered without the noise. Subscribe to never miss a beat.

Charlie Stross – On the non-use of AI in my writing process

antipope.org

August 1, 2026

6 min read

🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

52/100

Summary

Generative large language models (LLMs) are not used in the writing process. The author emphasizes a preference for original work over AI-generated content and criticizes the commercialization of LLMs.

Key Takeaways

The author does not use large language models (LLMs) in their writing process and believes they are unnecessary for producing fiction.
The author is involved in a class action lawsuit against Anthropic AI for allegedly using copyrighted material to train their LLMs.
The author criticizes LLMs for stealing content and competing with authors for revenue, equating their practices to theft.
The author asserts that LLMs lack sentience and are merely word-association tools without real-world understanding.

Read original article

Community Sentiment

Mixed

Positives

There's a real desire for locally-run AI tools that can help authors plan and edit their manuscripts without the cloud's complications — a sign of growing autonomy in the writing process.
Commenters are excited about the potential for AI to assist in scene mapping and character tracking, showcasing a clear interest in blending technology with creative writing.

Concerns

The article's technical inaccuracies about AI, like misattributing GANs to LLMs, really undermine the author's credibility and reflect a lack of understanding of the technology.
Many commenters feel that dismissive critiques of AI in writing are just 'pablum' — a sign that the debate is becoming polarized and often misses nuanced perspectives.
There's a strong sense of skepticism regarding the author's perspective, with users questioning whether his views align with the realities of modern AI capabilities in creative fields.