Posted on 07/21/2026 3:12:44 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
This week I was replaced by AI. I saw it coming, but it didn’t make the news any easier to deal with. To be honest, it terrifies me for the future of our species. If that sounds a bit over the top, hear me out.
I am a writer. Not only that, I am a commercially successful one. Although you probably haven’t heard of me, I’ve published more than 300 short stories in women’s magazines over the past 15 years. From ghost stories in Woman’s Weekly to tales of romance in Take a Break Fiction Feast, I write them all. Sorry – wrote.
Dear Geoff,’ the email said. ‘Going forward, our in-house team will be using AI tools to compile future editions, but we thank you for your many contributions to the magazine over the years. Kind regards, Rebecca.’ Or to put it more bluntly: ‘We’ve replaced you with a robot.’
I enjoyed writing all my stories. Sure, they were not exactly high art. I never expected a call from the Pulitzer panel or an invitation from Radio 4 to discuss how I manage to express the human condition. But coming up with characters, throwing them into difficult situations and seeing how they coped, writing dialogue that felt real, inventing satisfying-yet-believable twists, was all fun to write and, I hope, fun to read.
So I began typing my reply to Rebecca. I hadn’t even finished the first sentence when the truth occurred to me: Rebecca doesn’t exist. If a women’s magazine no longer needs writers, why does it need an ‘in-house team’? A vision rose in my mind of someone arriving at an office in the morning, switching on a computer, then going home again while the computer produced a magazine.
But the end of my career didn’t surprise me, because three things told me this was coming. The first was when my dad died two years ago. There was no funeral – he didn’t want one – but some close family had a small get-together where we planted a tree in my mum’s garden. ‘Has anyone thought of any words we could say?’ my mum asked. No one had. So I thought it would be amusing to give ChatGPT a few prompts to write a poem. My dad would have appreciated that. Within a few seconds I was reading out ‘A West Ham Fan’, a poem filled with humour and pathos. It was good.
The second thing that happened was a song appearing in my YouTube feed. ‘Pocket of his Raincoat’ was sung by Paul McCartney with a simple acoustic guitar backing, a Beatles ballad with wonderfully esoteric lyrics and a haunting melody. I love the Beatles and here was a song up there with ‘Yesterday’ and ‘For No One’. Why had I never heard it before? Then I noticed the performer: the AI Beatles. I had discovered a new favourite Beatles track neither written nor performed by the Beatles themselves. I was listening to a machine.
And the third thing. A few months ago, as an experiment, I prompted ChatGPT to write me a story I could sell to a women’s magazine: ‘Make it 700 words long, a love story, humorous, with an unexpected and emotionally satisfying ending.’ As soon as I hit return on my computer the story immediately began scrolling out on my screen. That story – funny and as good as any I have ever written or read – has sat on my computer ever since, an unsubmitted harbinger of the end of human story-telling. The unavoidable consequence of ever-improving AI is nothing less than the end of all human creativity.
There is no way to stop it. What Beatles fan is going to resist listening to a new album from the Fab Four because it was written and recorded by an AI app? Who wouldn’t be curious about a new Shakespeare play or a tenth symphony by Beethoven? And if you think it won’t happen, a quick search online will show you it already is.
YouTube is full of new songs from dead artists, movie scenes from actors who have never worked together, speeches and jokes from deceased politicians they never made. There are even concerts where Elvis Presley and the Beatles perform together in packed stadiums, concerts that never happened in real life. You might say all this machine imagination simply isn’t as good as the real thing. I say, give it time.
Some artists and creative industry organisations have fought back against AI. What is interesting about this fight, however, is that mostly it’s been about compensation for artists whose work is being used to train AI programs. In other words, if you want to teach AI to write a song in the style of Ed Sheeran or produce a novel in the ‘voice’ of JK Rowling, the argument is not about if it should be done, but whether these artists and writers should be compensated and if so how much. What this fightback misses is the new talent, the undiscovered storytellers and songwriters who will never be published or recorded. And it misses something else, something more fundamental.
AI doesn’t just mean short story writers and wannabe popstars are losing their careers. The unavoidable consequence of ever-improving AI is nothing less than the end of all human creativity. Why? Because whether it’s a novel or a rock song, a portrait or a poem, who is going to spend the years of study and practice required to produce something that can be churned out by a computer in seconds?
Even if an artist doesn’t use AI, who is going to believe them? If an unknown author writes the next One Hundred Years of Solitude, how will we know AI didn’t help? A young singer-songwriter is hailed as the new Bob Dylan? Maybe he just selected the ‘Dylan’ option on the songwriting app. In a world where music, art and literature can be made by machine, everyone will assume it was made by machine.
There is a story about Chicago in the 1880s. Back then, experts predicted cities would be buried under horse manure because of the growing number of horse-drawn vehicles. The arrival of the car and other motorised transport made those predictions obsolete. This story comes to mind because a couple of years ago TV personality Monty Don wrote an article suggesting prized jobs in broadcasting and the arts should no longer be given to privately educated straight white men like him, and instead previously under-represented minorities should be prioritised.
I was angry and wrote to Monty Don to tell him why. My son is white and from a working class background. But he worked hard, put in thousands of hours of practice, and won a fully-paid music scholarship to a private school. ‘Why should my son be overlooked just because he is white?’ I asked Monty Don.
Monty Don never replied and now I realise it doesn’t matter. Just like Chicago in the 1880s, technology has provided an answer no one expected. Black or white, male or female, straight or gay, there will be no jobs left in the arts for anyone.
It does it the same way human musicians do, both are trained listening to and reviewing music, and use their training experiences to generate new melodies, but these new melodies come from what they’ve been exposed to and have taken in, its just the ai’s can be trained faster and on a lot more input
It doesnt mean everything they generate is awesome or good, just like human creators, not all songs are hits.
Yes. Who are the puppet masters programing the machines?
One of the unspoken questions is why people come to “the arts” to begin with. Different people, different purposes. Different times ....
It’s one thing to settle down at the end of a day and reach for an easy reading book or turn on a tv seeking escapist entertainment. That’s fine in its place. AI will probably be good at generating content.
The question is whether AI will be able to challenge us, surprise us, teach us, inspire us. That requires an encounter with The Other in a context that has stakes that matter and challenges that begin with recognition, communication, and the development of intersubjective consensus.
The arts are just one of the many domains where this is the heart of the matter. A book is a conversation between the author and his readers. The performing arts are a conversation between the performers and the audience. And within the performance itself, the collaboration between the writers, directors, and actors — or the conductor and musicians in music — is the thing. There are many common expressions of this. One of the most common is the reflection of the writer or director that they never saw or understood the potential of their work until some gifted actors brought it to life. Movie magic happens when the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, and people are surprised and moved.
Most movies aren’t that good. AI will probably do just fine with the flying spandex comic book films.
Do you really think robots won’t be able to do that?
I was around for the first laptops... They actually created jobs because they needed geeks to tell you to ‘turn it off, and then turn it back on’... Techs and Engineers utilized the computers to do their work and techs started doing CAD instead of drawing stuff on paper... The computer revolution actually created jobs.
Now that everything has been scanned and is searchable by AI... You really don’t need somebody to give you existing documentation or do those drawings... AI gives you the info you need and you then tell the AI what you want it to draw and it draws it. I worked in a design office and maintained archival info... Somebody took over my job when I retired, but I’m pretty sure they will soon be replaced by AI, as all the techs I used to work with will also be replaced by AI... That entire office will likely be a couple of Architects, a couple of Engineers and a few assistants... The rest of them will be replaced by AI.
That will be the case in a lot of offices... Office support workers in general will become a thing of the past... That’s a large amount of jobs and those people will need to be guided towards something more practical. Like bartending and waitressing, or carpentry.
“””Do you really think robots won’t be able to do that?””
They won’t.
Or else we'll all be sitting around With Folded Hands...
But what if AI uses a person’s name, image, likeness, or copyrighted material without the person’s consent?
There’s your problem
Arts career is more than painting daises, it includes two fields I was in, graphic art, designing magazine, book covers, ads, et., and broadcasting. AI is taking over that now which to me is really sad.
“....tails of Romance?....”
Go f—k yourself dip shxt. I wasn’t talking to you.
I’m immune...I’m retired.
Anthro-bots UNION coming soon.
My group knew immediately. Not that they knew it was AI, but they said, "This sounds off. It doesn't sound like you." They are continuously complimenting me on my "voice," so I took the hint and only use AI like a thesaurus now, or if I need to reorganize or tweak the plot structure. Then I read it out loud to myself, and if it doesn't sound like something I would say, I leave it out.
I’m hearing engineers are also on the list for replacement by AI.
They should be compensated. And Geoff Bagwell here should be compensated. He should sue his former employer for serious royalties off every AI article they print.
In that AI directly is now directly using his creative talents and abilities to mass produce the short stories he used to write.
My daughter earned a BA in journalism & public relations with honors in 2007 and has had a fulfilling career as a home-based web content writer while also raising 2 kids. Her workload was recently cut in half thanks to AI taking over that industry. Thank God her husband has a great job as a UX manager for a Fortune 500 company, but I think even his job will be gobbled up by AI in the near future. Uncertain times for everyone.
Don’t like job losses to tech, but that’s happened since the industrial revolution prob longer. A common theme is buggy whip makers being unemployed by autos.
Likewise.
Thankfully that is where my son and grandkids are, except one (the loopy lib one)...construction related
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.