Non-profit organization Nanowrimo expressed her position in relation to the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the process of writing texts. According to Nanowrimo, the categorical rejection of AI is a manifestation of class discrimination and discrimination on the basis of disability. Such a step caused a violent reaction on the network, led to care several members of the organization’s council and refusal one of the sponsors from cooperation.
Nanowrimo believes that the complete condemnation of AI ignores the social and economic problems associated with the use of this technology. The organization also noted that the use of AI is closely related to the issues of privileges, and can benefit people who need to help write texts due to physical or cognitive restrictions.
Nanowrimo is known for its annual competition, in which participants write a work for 50,000 words during November. The organization is sure that the condemnation of AI would affect those who need help in creating texts and cannot afford to hire assistants, or are faced with restrictions due to disability.
After the statement of Nanowrimo has spread on social networks, many writers expressed dissatisfaction. One of the main claims was that generative models of AI are trained on large volumes of existing texts, including copyrights protected by copyright, without indicating authorship or compensation for their authors. This causes serious ethical issues, especially in the context of creative contests and challenges.
Writer Chuck Wendig, author of the book Star Wars: The aftermath, spoke out against the position of Nanowrimo. Wendig noted that generative AI serves not writers or artists, but to technological companies that process existing content, which looks like the creation of “Frankensteins” from other people’s works.
Member of the Nanowrimo Council, writer Daniel Jose Older, announced about his departure from the post after the publication of the statement. Older emphasized that he no longer wants to be part of the organization supporting AI, and urged other writers to follow his example.
Many authors have especially acutely responded to the use of Nanowrimo terms “Class Discrimination” and “Discrimination with disability” to justify the use of generative AI. Some of the opponents of AI themselves are disabled and believe such an explanation is unacceptable. One of the users X* wrote that the use of other people’s works as an excuse for inclusiveness cannot be considered accessibility.