Bill Conrad's Blog - Posts Tagged "society"
Living in a Dystopian Present
Wikipedia defines dystopia as “an imaginary community or society that is undesirable or frightening. It is literally translated from Greek as ‘not-good place,’ an antonym of utopia.” For as long as there have been fiction writers, they have been envisioning a dystopian future. We see it today in stories such as Mad Max, Enders Game, Blade Runner, The Walking Dead, Book of Eli, 1984 and many others. The dystopia future allows writers to paint the picture of a bleak future where people run amuck. This allows writers to have the plot freedom that cannot be achieved in the present “normal” world.
There is a twofold reason why people are drawn to this kind of plot. Let’s use the Mad Max franchise as an example. The characters in Mad Max are on the brink of starvation and they drive around in crazy cars attempting to survive. Why do we like this? Because society does not allow this this kind of outlandish behavior. If somebody were to drive a “non-street legal” car around while committing many crimes, it would be big news and the person would be arrested. This is a good thing because bad driving and crime is detrimental to a pleasant society.
When we let our imagination wonder away from our normal society and enjoy the Mad Max story, it’s kind of fun. How cool would it be to drive around in a super charged monster car? Breaking everything in sight and overcoming adversity? That is precisely why we like the Mad Max dystopian future. There are no rules and this helps us cope with the rules we don’t like in our society. The result is essentially an entertaining pressure release.
The second aspect we like about dystopian future is to compare this horrible future world to our own. For example, we might think, Meatloaf again? Well, that is not as bad as when Mad Max was grateful to eat a can of dog food. This terrible future reminds us how good our present lives are.
The only problem with dystopian future stories is that the envisioned dystopian future simply does not come true. Sometimes the readers panic over what they think might happen. For example, The Walking Dead inspired a LOT of people to buy guns.
When writers attempt to predict the future, the results are lofty and creative. If we rewind back to the 1950’s, it was predicted by many writers that in the 1980’s, there would be: flying atomic powered cars, robots walking among us, space travel, oppressive governments and nuclear wars. Obviously, none of these basic predictions came true. Of course, there were more realistic [conservative] writers that did a much better job of predicting the future such as Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov. Their stories predicted such ideas as satellite communication and realistic computer usage.
Another aspect of the dystopian future stories from the 1950’s that has not come true is an oppressive society. Let’s take for example the George Orwell book 1984 written in 1949. It predicted a tightly controlled state where all people are closely watched all the time. Any crime is instantly detected and severally punished. May people have said that this dystopian future is here today. The point out that there are millions of security cameras along with millions of computers that automatically monitor our everyday activities. In addition, they point out an effective criminal system that uses technology such as DNA resulting in an unfair trial.
I do not disagree with the abundance of cameras, spying computers and unfair trials. However, our present is not even close to the dystopian future that George Orwell predicted. Few of these cameras are actively monitored. The cameras images are generally only looked at after a crime has occurred. In some public places, the cameras are actively monitored by security people. It is also true that in these places, the security people have abused the public’s trust. Has the abundance of cameras really stopped crime? Arguably, yes. Has it made our world better by stopping crime? Arguably, yes.
As for the computers monitoring our every move? Yes, there are sophisticated computers automatically monitoring us and sophisticated computers are even other computer systems. Are big government organizations monitoring me? Yes, but I am a nobody. The government doesn’t have the resources to prosecute my little crimes that are caught by cameras or computers. What about the computer monitoring? The main aspect of computer monitoring that truly affects me is that companies gain an edge for advertising and better marketing. [Do I really know what I am talking about? Check out patents 09/589,552 and 13/507,371] Is this computer monitoring wrong? Ya, probably. What effect does it have on me personally? I buy more stuff. Some of that stuff makes my life better and some of it is junk. Most of what I buy, I need or at least that is what I convince myself.
Have I lost all kinds of freedoms as the result of all this computer monitoring? Probably. Does this really affect me? Not really. Are computers listening to my phone conversations? Technically yes, actually no. Criminals spend a lot of time on the phone and computers and are generally not caught in this manner. Are my rights being violated by computers? Ya, probably. What is the worst aspect of this dreadful violation? The worst (in my opinion) is identity theft. Do I like it? I have been the victim of identity theft several times and I think the people that perpetrate this crime should be shot without trial. Why? When they took on my identity and in the process, they lost their own identity so technically they don’t exist. Will my punishment ever occur? Absolutely not. What does this have to do with government and society? Not much. Identity theft is just a new way for criminals to operate. People will always look for short cuts and identity theft is the new short cut.
What about AI? Will it destroy us all? It’s very unlikely. Computers are programmed by people and people still want to live peaceful lives. If we rewind back to the 1950’s there was a big scare with robots and computers. Robots first entered the factories and started taking the jobs from welders. What percentage of the factory did they take? Up to 1%. How about today? Now robots may have taken up to 20% of the assembly line jobs. But that’s misleading. Who builds and maintains the robots? People. Robots have just moved the jobs around.
Computers in the 1950’s took away jobs from people that worked with numbers. Today, computers take away jobs like: supermarket cashiers, bank tellers, newspaper printers/paperboys and record/tape/CD manufactures. However, like the factory robots, these jobs just got moved around to places like Facebook and Google. The overall result is that some jobs have been permanently taken away by computers. One could just as easily argue that increased government regulation, taxes, economic changes and worldwide labor shifts [jobs moving to different countries] are far more responsible for job loss than AI, robots or computers.
What about the oppression of the poor and disadvantaged? People will always be taken advantage of and this has been going on since before even writers could put words on a printed page. The good news is that the poor and disadvantaged now have many more options. For example, a person can get an accredited college degree online for nearly free.
Dystopian future writers have envisioned a world where the poor and disadvantaged rise up against “the man” and overthrow society into chaos. I would argue that this is actually occurring, but in a different form. It turns out that the poor and disadvantaged can vote just fine. It also turns out that they can use the internet/media to organize and their votes are now a force to be reckoned with. It also turns out that people can use internet/media in countries that you cannot vote to make effective changes in the government and society. So, in many ways the revolution has been going on for a long time with great results.
The point of this blog article is that the dystopian future predictions that all of these writers made in the 1950’s never really came true and that present dystopian future predictions are not likely to come true. Now let’s look at some things that did happen. There have been horrific events since the 1950’s that have deeply disrupted our lives. This included wars, natural disasters, manmade disasters, terrorist attacks and great social shifts due to technology.
Take for example, the horrific 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. This dreadful natural disaster was so big that it actually changed the maps of Japan. After the horrific incident, the proud people of Japan, mourned their losses, cleaned up, rebuilt, learned some lessons and got on with their lives. The point is that the people of Japan did not turn their country into anarchy like The Walking Dead where everybody killed to survive. Their society naturally dwelled toward getting back to a peaceful existence. Why did their society not turn into anarchy? The people of Japan wanted a peaceful society. They liked having safe streets, clean water and their children going to school. This horrific situation is a great example of how all the makings of a dystopian future were present and yet the people went far out of their way to make sure that they went back to a peaceful boring existence.
Our world is going to have wars [as I write this, North Korea looks like they might even start a nuclear war] and epic world changing natural disasters such as: super volcanos, comet impacts and plagues. Humans are survivors and it is in our core values to get through the bad times. It won’t be easy and there will be significant losses. However, it is in our “human” nature to return to a peaceful boring existence. When the next tragic event occurs, we will tough it out and get back to the way we are now.
My point in writing this blog article is that there is a natural drive within humans to live quiet boring lives and that’s just fine. There will always be writers that write about the dystopian future and that is also just fine. I personally like the Walking Dead and never miss an episode. We like stories that have excitement/drama/conflict and this is why the dystopian future stories were invented.
However, we must keep the concept of the dystopian future in check. These dystopian future stories are farfetched predictions are simply not going to come true. If you watch an episode of the Walking Dead and decide to build an underground survival shelter, you may want to reconsider your motives. History simply does not support that kind of possibility.
I was just about to post this blog and I noticed something. When I was in college at WPI in 1993, there was a student paper and this paper had an anonymous writer who went by the name of Froto. He took this penname from the Lord of The Rings character. Every week, Froto had a new rant that went on and on. Nothing was ever good and he whined about all that was bad while offering no solutions. I was annoyed by all of Froto’s writings and I generally skipped over that entire section of the paper.
It began to dawn on me that this blog post was kind of in the same vain. Here I am complaining about some minor aspect of our wonderful world. This made me think back to Froto’s endless complaints and it gave me time to pause. We are privileged to have the extra resources to employ writers and bring their visions to the wide screens. As proof of this; not a lot of North Korean fiction writers out there. What I have written in this blog is a simple observation. In essence, the dystopian writers envisioned a bleak dystopian future that never materialized. I am hoping that the people who read this blog do not feel that I am whining about dystopian future works. There are plenty of specific examples of fictional dystopian future’s that did indeed come true and I enjoy reading/watching dystopian future stories.
Now for the important part. BUY MY BOOK. PLEASE!!! MY CHECKBOOK IS LONELY! MY BOOK IS ONLY $2.99 ON AMAZON!!! Putting a review online will help me out even more.
You’re the best -Bill
September 24, 2017
There is a twofold reason why people are drawn to this kind of plot. Let’s use the Mad Max franchise as an example. The characters in Mad Max are on the brink of starvation and they drive around in crazy cars attempting to survive. Why do we like this? Because society does not allow this this kind of outlandish behavior. If somebody were to drive a “non-street legal” car around while committing many crimes, it would be big news and the person would be arrested. This is a good thing because bad driving and crime is detrimental to a pleasant society.
When we let our imagination wonder away from our normal society and enjoy the Mad Max story, it’s kind of fun. How cool would it be to drive around in a super charged monster car? Breaking everything in sight and overcoming adversity? That is precisely why we like the Mad Max dystopian future. There are no rules and this helps us cope with the rules we don’t like in our society. The result is essentially an entertaining pressure release.
The second aspect we like about dystopian future is to compare this horrible future world to our own. For example, we might think, Meatloaf again? Well, that is not as bad as when Mad Max was grateful to eat a can of dog food. This terrible future reminds us how good our present lives are.
The only problem with dystopian future stories is that the envisioned dystopian future simply does not come true. Sometimes the readers panic over what they think might happen. For example, The Walking Dead inspired a LOT of people to buy guns.
When writers attempt to predict the future, the results are lofty and creative. If we rewind back to the 1950’s, it was predicted by many writers that in the 1980’s, there would be: flying atomic powered cars, robots walking among us, space travel, oppressive governments and nuclear wars. Obviously, none of these basic predictions came true. Of course, there were more realistic [conservative] writers that did a much better job of predicting the future such as Arthur C. Clarke and Isaac Asimov. Their stories predicted such ideas as satellite communication and realistic computer usage.
Another aspect of the dystopian future stories from the 1950’s that has not come true is an oppressive society. Let’s take for example the George Orwell book 1984 written in 1949. It predicted a tightly controlled state where all people are closely watched all the time. Any crime is instantly detected and severally punished. May people have said that this dystopian future is here today. The point out that there are millions of security cameras along with millions of computers that automatically monitor our everyday activities. In addition, they point out an effective criminal system that uses technology such as DNA resulting in an unfair trial.
I do not disagree with the abundance of cameras, spying computers and unfair trials. However, our present is not even close to the dystopian future that George Orwell predicted. Few of these cameras are actively monitored. The cameras images are generally only looked at after a crime has occurred. In some public places, the cameras are actively monitored by security people. It is also true that in these places, the security people have abused the public’s trust. Has the abundance of cameras really stopped crime? Arguably, yes. Has it made our world better by stopping crime? Arguably, yes.
As for the computers monitoring our every move? Yes, there are sophisticated computers automatically monitoring us and sophisticated computers are even other computer systems. Are big government organizations monitoring me? Yes, but I am a nobody. The government doesn’t have the resources to prosecute my little crimes that are caught by cameras or computers. What about the computer monitoring? The main aspect of computer monitoring that truly affects me is that companies gain an edge for advertising and better marketing. [Do I really know what I am talking about? Check out patents 09/589,552 and 13/507,371] Is this computer monitoring wrong? Ya, probably. What effect does it have on me personally? I buy more stuff. Some of that stuff makes my life better and some of it is junk. Most of what I buy, I need or at least that is what I convince myself.
Have I lost all kinds of freedoms as the result of all this computer monitoring? Probably. Does this really affect me? Not really. Are computers listening to my phone conversations? Technically yes, actually no. Criminals spend a lot of time on the phone and computers and are generally not caught in this manner. Are my rights being violated by computers? Ya, probably. What is the worst aspect of this dreadful violation? The worst (in my opinion) is identity theft. Do I like it? I have been the victim of identity theft several times and I think the people that perpetrate this crime should be shot without trial. Why? When they took on my identity and in the process, they lost their own identity so technically they don’t exist. Will my punishment ever occur? Absolutely not. What does this have to do with government and society? Not much. Identity theft is just a new way for criminals to operate. People will always look for short cuts and identity theft is the new short cut.
What about AI? Will it destroy us all? It’s very unlikely. Computers are programmed by people and people still want to live peaceful lives. If we rewind back to the 1950’s there was a big scare with robots and computers. Robots first entered the factories and started taking the jobs from welders. What percentage of the factory did they take? Up to 1%. How about today? Now robots may have taken up to 20% of the assembly line jobs. But that’s misleading. Who builds and maintains the robots? People. Robots have just moved the jobs around.
Computers in the 1950’s took away jobs from people that worked with numbers. Today, computers take away jobs like: supermarket cashiers, bank tellers, newspaper printers/paperboys and record/tape/CD manufactures. However, like the factory robots, these jobs just got moved around to places like Facebook and Google. The overall result is that some jobs have been permanently taken away by computers. One could just as easily argue that increased government regulation, taxes, economic changes and worldwide labor shifts [jobs moving to different countries] are far more responsible for job loss than AI, robots or computers.
What about the oppression of the poor and disadvantaged? People will always be taken advantage of and this has been going on since before even writers could put words on a printed page. The good news is that the poor and disadvantaged now have many more options. For example, a person can get an accredited college degree online for nearly free.
Dystopian future writers have envisioned a world where the poor and disadvantaged rise up against “the man” and overthrow society into chaos. I would argue that this is actually occurring, but in a different form. It turns out that the poor and disadvantaged can vote just fine. It also turns out that they can use the internet/media to organize and their votes are now a force to be reckoned with. It also turns out that people can use internet/media in countries that you cannot vote to make effective changes in the government and society. So, in many ways the revolution has been going on for a long time with great results.
The point of this blog article is that the dystopian future predictions that all of these writers made in the 1950’s never really came true and that present dystopian future predictions are not likely to come true. Now let’s look at some things that did happen. There have been horrific events since the 1950’s that have deeply disrupted our lives. This included wars, natural disasters, manmade disasters, terrorist attacks and great social shifts due to technology.
Take for example, the horrific 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. This dreadful natural disaster was so big that it actually changed the maps of Japan. After the horrific incident, the proud people of Japan, mourned their losses, cleaned up, rebuilt, learned some lessons and got on with their lives. The point is that the people of Japan did not turn their country into anarchy like The Walking Dead where everybody killed to survive. Their society naturally dwelled toward getting back to a peaceful existence. Why did their society not turn into anarchy? The people of Japan wanted a peaceful society. They liked having safe streets, clean water and their children going to school. This horrific situation is a great example of how all the makings of a dystopian future were present and yet the people went far out of their way to make sure that they went back to a peaceful boring existence.
Our world is going to have wars [as I write this, North Korea looks like they might even start a nuclear war] and epic world changing natural disasters such as: super volcanos, comet impacts and plagues. Humans are survivors and it is in our core values to get through the bad times. It won’t be easy and there will be significant losses. However, it is in our “human” nature to return to a peaceful boring existence. When the next tragic event occurs, we will tough it out and get back to the way we are now.
My point in writing this blog article is that there is a natural drive within humans to live quiet boring lives and that’s just fine. There will always be writers that write about the dystopian future and that is also just fine. I personally like the Walking Dead and never miss an episode. We like stories that have excitement/drama/conflict and this is why the dystopian future stories were invented.
However, we must keep the concept of the dystopian future in check. These dystopian future stories are farfetched predictions are simply not going to come true. If you watch an episode of the Walking Dead and decide to build an underground survival shelter, you may want to reconsider your motives. History simply does not support that kind of possibility.
I was just about to post this blog and I noticed something. When I was in college at WPI in 1993, there was a student paper and this paper had an anonymous writer who went by the name of Froto. He took this penname from the Lord of The Rings character. Every week, Froto had a new rant that went on and on. Nothing was ever good and he whined about all that was bad while offering no solutions. I was annoyed by all of Froto’s writings and I generally skipped over that entire section of the paper.
It began to dawn on me that this blog post was kind of in the same vain. Here I am complaining about some minor aspect of our wonderful world. This made me think back to Froto’s endless complaints and it gave me time to pause. We are privileged to have the extra resources to employ writers and bring their visions to the wide screens. As proof of this; not a lot of North Korean fiction writers out there. What I have written in this blog is a simple observation. In essence, the dystopian writers envisioned a bleak dystopian future that never materialized. I am hoping that the people who read this blog do not feel that I am whining about dystopian future works. There are plenty of specific examples of fictional dystopian future’s that did indeed come true and I enjoy reading/watching dystopian future stories.
Now for the important part. BUY MY BOOK. PLEASE!!! MY CHECKBOOK IS LONELY! MY BOOK IS ONLY $2.99 ON AMAZON!!! Putting a review online will help me out even more.
You’re the best -Bill
September 24, 2017
Used To Be Acceptable
Humans have evolved over millions of years, but along the way, there have been mistakes. One unfortunate “improvement” was disrespecting a segment of our society. For example, applying uncomplimentary names to different races, creeds, or sexual orientations. These slurs used to be acceptable in everyday conversation, literature, and media.
The good news is that most people in our society are now educated enough to recognize uncomplimentary terms, and we no longer tolerate them. However, there are a few problems left to iron out.
How do we deal with older books or movies with material we now consider offensive? Some people wish to keep these “classic” works available because they are “examples of how we used to be.” Others want these works to be edited to modern standards, and others wish these works to be destroyed. Offensive material presents problems for school districts, libraries, content holders, and bookstores who must decide what books to keep in circulation.
Let’s examine the three options. The novel Huckleberry Finn contains disrespectful content and is still in circulation without edits. However, some organizations use copies with a disclaimer/warning to prepare readers. Other organizations choose not to make this work available.
The Hardy Boys books used to contain racially insensitive scenes, characters, and dialog. The first book came out in 1927, and the entire series was re-released in the ‘50s with edits to remove disrespectful material. But by the ‘90s, it was time for another refresh, and more material got removed. However, many libraries continue to ban these popular books because of their disrespectful past.
In the ‘20s through ‘50s, several grossly insensitive films were released. I am sure there are a few examples in film vaults, but most were discarded. Today, it is impossible to find conversions of these insensitive works on DVD or other media. Even documentaries that examine this offensive subject have difficulties locating examples.
There is another problem. How do writers create characters, descriptions, or scenes set in the past? Do we use outdated methods for historical accuracy? Or take a lighter approach by tastefully (respectfully) acknowledging improper treatment? Another option is to close our eyes to the awful past and write to modern standards. It is a tough call, and writers must make a choice.
Some bold writers choose to create works with disrespectful material. They feel their material is more historically accurate, shocking, educating, and eye-opening. Some readers/viewers enjoy such works, and others feel writers are capitalizing on prior poor treatment of people.
I do not enjoy such works. Does this mean I am ignoring the past? (Turning a blind eye to suffering.) I know well that people were treated poorly. Yet, I agree some people need “a good smack of reality to get them on the better path.” And important stories must be told “in the raw” to make society not repeat prior mistakes. Still, this material makes me want to yell, “You (people in the past) should know better!”
There is another elephant in the room. Society enjoys bold works, and timid authors are relegated to poverty. Does this mean that fearless writers profit from the awful things that occurred in the past? Umm, sometimes they do. Bummer. Well, this is not a great way to end a blog. However, there is still some good news. Remember at the beginning of this blog? Society is getting better.
The good news is that most people in our society are now educated enough to recognize uncomplimentary terms, and we no longer tolerate them. However, there are a few problems left to iron out.
How do we deal with older books or movies with material we now consider offensive? Some people wish to keep these “classic” works available because they are “examples of how we used to be.” Others want these works to be edited to modern standards, and others wish these works to be destroyed. Offensive material presents problems for school districts, libraries, content holders, and bookstores who must decide what books to keep in circulation.
Let’s examine the three options. The novel Huckleberry Finn contains disrespectful content and is still in circulation without edits. However, some organizations use copies with a disclaimer/warning to prepare readers. Other organizations choose not to make this work available.
The Hardy Boys books used to contain racially insensitive scenes, characters, and dialog. The first book came out in 1927, and the entire series was re-released in the ‘50s with edits to remove disrespectful material. But by the ‘90s, it was time for another refresh, and more material got removed. However, many libraries continue to ban these popular books because of their disrespectful past.
In the ‘20s through ‘50s, several grossly insensitive films were released. I am sure there are a few examples in film vaults, but most were discarded. Today, it is impossible to find conversions of these insensitive works on DVD or other media. Even documentaries that examine this offensive subject have difficulties locating examples.
There is another problem. How do writers create characters, descriptions, or scenes set in the past? Do we use outdated methods for historical accuracy? Or take a lighter approach by tastefully (respectfully) acknowledging improper treatment? Another option is to close our eyes to the awful past and write to modern standards. It is a tough call, and writers must make a choice.
Some bold writers choose to create works with disrespectful material. They feel their material is more historically accurate, shocking, educating, and eye-opening. Some readers/viewers enjoy such works, and others feel writers are capitalizing on prior poor treatment of people.
I do not enjoy such works. Does this mean I am ignoring the past? (Turning a blind eye to suffering.) I know well that people were treated poorly. Yet, I agree some people need “a good smack of reality to get them on the better path.” And important stories must be told “in the raw” to make society not repeat prior mistakes. Still, this material makes me want to yell, “You (people in the past) should know better!”
There is another elephant in the room. Society enjoys bold works, and timid authors are relegated to poverty. Does this mean that fearless writers profit from the awful things that occurred in the past? Umm, sometimes they do. Bummer. Well, this is not a great way to end a blog. However, there is still some good news. Remember at the beginning of this blog? Society is getting better.
ChatGPT Fiction
ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence language program that analyzes existing text to write stories, descriptions, research, reports, and text messages. It has become popular among teens for writing texts and doing homework. Adults now use it to do their jobs, and its creations have ended up in many important documents.
ChatGPT caught teachers off guard because its work is fantastic, and they cannot tell the difference between an excellent student and a ChatGPT document. Furthermore, because this technology is so new, companies do not know that workers use it. This usage will lead to legal and ethical issues.
I was vaguely aware of ChatGPT until a month ago when South Park lambasted it. After the episode, I wanted to see what ChatGPT offered a fiction author. So, I got an account and asked ChatGPT to write a story.
Here is what ChatGPT generated when I fed it a vague description of my first book, “Write a story about an immortal woman who forces a disgraced author to interview her. She lived an astounding 500-year life and met many famous people. Her immortality source came from harvesting the organs of living people.”
Once a celebrated author, Richard had fallen from grace. His last book had been panned by critics, and his once loyal fans had turned their backs on him. He spent his days drinking and smoking, drowning in self-pity, until one day he received a strange letter.
The letter was from a woman named Cassandra, and it was unlike any letter he had ever received. Cassandra claimed to be over 500 years old, and she offered Richard an exclusive interview. She promised to tell him the story of her incredible life, a life filled with adventure, tragedy, and celebrity encounters. Richard was skeptical, but also curious. He agreed to the interview, and Cassandra provided him with an address and a time to meet.
The address turned out to be an abandoned warehouse on the outskirts of town. Richard arrived at the designated time, and he found Cassandra waiting for him inside. She was an imposing figure, tall and regal, with long black hair and piercing green eyes. She wore a flowing red dress that seemed out of place in the dilapidated surroundings.
Cassandra wasted no time in getting to the point. “I need you to tell my story,” she said. “I need the world to know who I am and what I have accomplished. And I need you to do it.”
Richard was taken aback. “Why me?” he asked. “There are plenty of other journalists who would be more than happy to tell your story.”
Cassandra smiled wryly. “Because you are a disgraced author,” she said. “You have nothing left to lose. And because I know you have a way with words. You can make people care about my story, even if they don’t believe it.”
Richard hesitated, but he could see the determination in Cassandra’s eyes. He agreed to the interview, and over the course of the next few hours, Cassandra told him the story of her incredible life.
She had been born in the early 1500s, and she had discovered her immortality by accident. She had been experimenting with medicine, and she had discovered a way to harvest the organs of living people without killing them. She had used this method to keep herself young and vibrant for centuries.
As she told her story, Richard was both fascinated and repulsed. He couldn’t believe that someone could be so callous, so cruel. But he was also mesmerized by Cassandra’s stories of meeting famous people throughout history. She had met Shakespeare, Da Vinci, and Napoleon. She had seen the rise and fall of empires, the birth of new technologies, and the evolution of human society.
Wow! That was super impressive. This thoughtful and creative piece blows me away. And there was a fantastic coincidence. My 500-year-old character, Grace, met Napoleon. I did not know artificial intelligence had come so far.
My original blog plan was to tear apart the ChatGPT mess and proclaim myself superior. Bill rules! Well, that will not work. So, let’s evaluate the writing and ponder what this new technology means to me and society.
First, I would like to point out the excellent dialog integration. Cassandra wasted no time in getting to the point. “I need you to tell my story,” she said. “I need the world to know who I am and what I have accomplished.” Fantastic technique and great flow. The grammar and style are solid. Even the voice, intent, word choice, and confidence are great. Grammarly gave it a C, and ProWritingAid gave it a B. Microsoft Word grammar found no issues. Yet, the phrase “I need” and “she” got used too often, and there was some clunky flow. (It read stiff.) My grade for this generated fiction is a B. Very impressive for five minutes of work.
Now, let’s consider the big picture. When I want to write a story, I begin with an outline. This tool sets up the basic story arc, shows the overall flow, and reveals plot problems. The three sentences I fed into ChatVPT were the outline. I created the entire arc, and AI has difficulty generating (not copying from an existing work) even a basic arc. However, an outline is far from an actual story. The details are what a reader uses to fulfill the picture.
ChatGPT generated those details and added additional story. “She was an imposing figure, tall and regal, with long black hair and piercing green eyes. She wore a flowing red dress that seemed out of place in the dilapidated surroundings.” Those super-specific details pull the reader in.
While the generated story was impressive, it is not good enough for me to use for two reasons. First, the above results were not what I wanted to create because using an AI tool invalidates the point of writing. The second reason is that the results did not meet the minimum criteria or length to be a book. It should take at least a chapter to describe the main character and another chapter to ease the reader into the other main character into her life. However, it was fun to read what ChatGPT came up with.
I see two uses for ChatGPT to assist my writing process. First, when developing an outline, ChatGPT might flush out the plot. So, I will enter my next outline and see what it comes with. Perhaps ChatGPT will inspire ideas or reveal problems. Stay tuned for an update.
My second use will be for bolder character descriptions. I have difficulty thoroughly describing a character. “Fred walked into the room.” Done! Wait. How tall was he? What was he wearing? Readers expect much more, but those extra details seem unnecessary. (Not a good mental block for a writer.)
ChatGPT created an excellent description in the above writing. “She was an imposing figure, tall and regal, with long black hair and piercing green eyes. She wore a flowing red dress that seemed out of place in the dilapidated surroundings.” With some editing, that would be a perfect description for a female character.
However, I will not copy and paste text from ChatGPT. Not because of my ethics, it is because of my creativity. I do the writing for MY books, not somebody or something else. This is why I do not copy celebrated authors’ text, style, characters, scenes, or plots.
How does ChatGPT affect society? For teachers, it is a worst-case scenario. They will need ChatGPT detection software, and anti-cheat companies are already developing such tools. However, there is a broader problem for teachers and society.
Remember learning arithmetic? 1+1=2. However, when we discovered calculators, it did not seem necessary to learn. “Why learn when there are calculators?” That is a solid argument for students, but as adults, our education allows us to understand the logic behind math. However, many students did not learn because of calculators, and now many adults do not know arithmetic.
Why must a student learn how to write if ChatGPT can write for them? Another valid argument. Some students will take this path in life. But like a student who only knows how to use a calculator, they will not have the foundation to see mistakes, make improvements or go beyond what ChatGPT can create.
Let’s pretend I’m using a calculator and “fat-fingered” the buttons. 1+1=12. The answer is valid because calculators do not make mistakes. But my blog readers instantly see the error because they understand arithmetic. “There is no way that the answer can be that high.”
The same will be true with writing. ChatGPT is not perfect and will make obvious mistakes. Pretend that student grew up and is now using ChatGPT to write a safety instructions for their job. “Always use bare hands to touch the live wires.” Seems logical. Bare hands are clean, and we do not want to use dirty gloves on clean live wires. ZAP!!!
What about writing? I now see that if a person has a good plot outline and can edit segments together, they will be able to “write” a ChatGPT book. The result may not be perfect, the flow odd, and the story incomplete, but it will read well.
Because of my recent experiment, I now understand that a societal change has occurred. ChatGPT upped the game with excellent grammar, exciting descriptions, tasteful random elements, and solid dialog. Hey authors! All books (including the classics) will be judged to this improved standard in five years. For me, that is a scary concept. Of course, some readers will insist on the “old method” of “handmade writing.” However, that market will shrink.
What is the future of books? I see a day when writers will be conductors instead of “hands-on.” Is this bad? I do not know because ChatGPT impressed me. But do I want to “conduct” a book? Hmm. It does not sound like there will be much joy in that process.
Should we ban/limit ChatGPT? That suppression method has never worked in the past. Do we want organized crime to take over this space? Yet, I have seen legislation explicitly drafted to ban/limit ChatGPT. Hey taxpayers! Get ready for another fruitless battle to contain a bomb that has already exploded.
How about a ChatGPT blog? I may try to “write” one as an experiment, but I would inform my blog readers about my decision in advance. So, for now, you get the real deal.
You’re the best -Bill
April 19, 2023
Hey book lovers, I published three! Please check them out.
Interviewing Immortality is a psychological thriller about a 500-year-old woman who forces a disgraced author to interview her.
Pushed to the Edge of Survival is a drama, romance, and science fiction story about two unlikely people surviving a shipwreck and living with the consequences.
Cable Ties is a classic spy novel about two hunters discovering that government communications are being recorded and the ensuing FBI investigation.
These books are available in soft-cover on Amazon and eBook format everywhere.
ChatGPT caught teachers off guard because its work is fantastic, and they cannot tell the difference between an excellent student and a ChatGPT document. Furthermore, because this technology is so new, companies do not know that workers use it. This usage will lead to legal and ethical issues.
I was vaguely aware of ChatGPT until a month ago when South Park lambasted it. After the episode, I wanted to see what ChatGPT offered a fiction author. So, I got an account and asked ChatGPT to write a story.
Here is what ChatGPT generated when I fed it a vague description of my first book, “Write a story about an immortal woman who forces a disgraced author to interview her. She lived an astounding 500-year life and met many famous people. Her immortality source came from harvesting the organs of living people.”
Once a celebrated author, Richard had fallen from grace. His last book had been panned by critics, and his once loyal fans had turned their backs on him. He spent his days drinking and smoking, drowning in self-pity, until one day he received a strange letter.
The letter was from a woman named Cassandra, and it was unlike any letter he had ever received. Cassandra claimed to be over 500 years old, and she offered Richard an exclusive interview. She promised to tell him the story of her incredible life, a life filled with adventure, tragedy, and celebrity encounters. Richard was skeptical, but also curious. He agreed to the interview, and Cassandra provided him with an address and a time to meet.
The address turned out to be an abandoned warehouse on the outskirts of town. Richard arrived at the designated time, and he found Cassandra waiting for him inside. She was an imposing figure, tall and regal, with long black hair and piercing green eyes. She wore a flowing red dress that seemed out of place in the dilapidated surroundings.
Cassandra wasted no time in getting to the point. “I need you to tell my story,” she said. “I need the world to know who I am and what I have accomplished. And I need you to do it.”
Richard was taken aback. “Why me?” he asked. “There are plenty of other journalists who would be more than happy to tell your story.”
Cassandra smiled wryly. “Because you are a disgraced author,” she said. “You have nothing left to lose. And because I know you have a way with words. You can make people care about my story, even if they don’t believe it.”
Richard hesitated, but he could see the determination in Cassandra’s eyes. He agreed to the interview, and over the course of the next few hours, Cassandra told him the story of her incredible life.
She had been born in the early 1500s, and she had discovered her immortality by accident. She had been experimenting with medicine, and she had discovered a way to harvest the organs of living people without killing them. She had used this method to keep herself young and vibrant for centuries.
As she told her story, Richard was both fascinated and repulsed. He couldn’t believe that someone could be so callous, so cruel. But he was also mesmerized by Cassandra’s stories of meeting famous people throughout history. She had met Shakespeare, Da Vinci, and Napoleon. She had seen the rise and fall of empires, the birth of new technologies, and the evolution of human society.
Wow! That was super impressive. This thoughtful and creative piece blows me away. And there was a fantastic coincidence. My 500-year-old character, Grace, met Napoleon. I did not know artificial intelligence had come so far.
My original blog plan was to tear apart the ChatGPT mess and proclaim myself superior. Bill rules! Well, that will not work. So, let’s evaluate the writing and ponder what this new technology means to me and society.
First, I would like to point out the excellent dialog integration. Cassandra wasted no time in getting to the point. “I need you to tell my story,” she said. “I need the world to know who I am and what I have accomplished.” Fantastic technique and great flow. The grammar and style are solid. Even the voice, intent, word choice, and confidence are great. Grammarly gave it a C, and ProWritingAid gave it a B. Microsoft Word grammar found no issues. Yet, the phrase “I need” and “she” got used too often, and there was some clunky flow. (It read stiff.) My grade for this generated fiction is a B. Very impressive for five minutes of work.
Now, let’s consider the big picture. When I want to write a story, I begin with an outline. This tool sets up the basic story arc, shows the overall flow, and reveals plot problems. The three sentences I fed into ChatVPT were the outline. I created the entire arc, and AI has difficulty generating (not copying from an existing work) even a basic arc. However, an outline is far from an actual story. The details are what a reader uses to fulfill the picture.
ChatGPT generated those details and added additional story. “She was an imposing figure, tall and regal, with long black hair and piercing green eyes. She wore a flowing red dress that seemed out of place in the dilapidated surroundings.” Those super-specific details pull the reader in.
While the generated story was impressive, it is not good enough for me to use for two reasons. First, the above results were not what I wanted to create because using an AI tool invalidates the point of writing. The second reason is that the results did not meet the minimum criteria or length to be a book. It should take at least a chapter to describe the main character and another chapter to ease the reader into the other main character into her life. However, it was fun to read what ChatGPT came up with.
I see two uses for ChatGPT to assist my writing process. First, when developing an outline, ChatGPT might flush out the plot. So, I will enter my next outline and see what it comes with. Perhaps ChatGPT will inspire ideas or reveal problems. Stay tuned for an update.
My second use will be for bolder character descriptions. I have difficulty thoroughly describing a character. “Fred walked into the room.” Done! Wait. How tall was he? What was he wearing? Readers expect much more, but those extra details seem unnecessary. (Not a good mental block for a writer.)
ChatGPT created an excellent description in the above writing. “She was an imposing figure, tall and regal, with long black hair and piercing green eyes. She wore a flowing red dress that seemed out of place in the dilapidated surroundings.” With some editing, that would be a perfect description for a female character.
However, I will not copy and paste text from ChatGPT. Not because of my ethics, it is because of my creativity. I do the writing for MY books, not somebody or something else. This is why I do not copy celebrated authors’ text, style, characters, scenes, or plots.
How does ChatGPT affect society? For teachers, it is a worst-case scenario. They will need ChatGPT detection software, and anti-cheat companies are already developing such tools. However, there is a broader problem for teachers and society.
Remember learning arithmetic? 1+1=2. However, when we discovered calculators, it did not seem necessary to learn. “Why learn when there are calculators?” That is a solid argument for students, but as adults, our education allows us to understand the logic behind math. However, many students did not learn because of calculators, and now many adults do not know arithmetic.
Why must a student learn how to write if ChatGPT can write for them? Another valid argument. Some students will take this path in life. But like a student who only knows how to use a calculator, they will not have the foundation to see mistakes, make improvements or go beyond what ChatGPT can create.
Let’s pretend I’m using a calculator and “fat-fingered” the buttons. 1+1=12. The answer is valid because calculators do not make mistakes. But my blog readers instantly see the error because they understand arithmetic. “There is no way that the answer can be that high.”
The same will be true with writing. ChatGPT is not perfect and will make obvious mistakes. Pretend that student grew up and is now using ChatGPT to write a safety instructions for their job. “Always use bare hands to touch the live wires.” Seems logical. Bare hands are clean, and we do not want to use dirty gloves on clean live wires. ZAP!!!
What about writing? I now see that if a person has a good plot outline and can edit segments together, they will be able to “write” a ChatGPT book. The result may not be perfect, the flow odd, and the story incomplete, but it will read well.
Because of my recent experiment, I now understand that a societal change has occurred. ChatGPT upped the game with excellent grammar, exciting descriptions, tasteful random elements, and solid dialog. Hey authors! All books (including the classics) will be judged to this improved standard in five years. For me, that is a scary concept. Of course, some readers will insist on the “old method” of “handmade writing.” However, that market will shrink.
What is the future of books? I see a day when writers will be conductors instead of “hands-on.” Is this bad? I do not know because ChatGPT impressed me. But do I want to “conduct” a book? Hmm. It does not sound like there will be much joy in that process.
Should we ban/limit ChatGPT? That suppression method has never worked in the past. Do we want organized crime to take over this space? Yet, I have seen legislation explicitly drafted to ban/limit ChatGPT. Hey taxpayers! Get ready for another fruitless battle to contain a bomb that has already exploded.
How about a ChatGPT blog? I may try to “write” one as an experiment, but I would inform my blog readers about my decision in advance. So, for now, you get the real deal.
You’re the best -Bill
April 19, 2023
Hey book lovers, I published three! Please check them out.
Interviewing Immortality is a psychological thriller about a 500-year-old woman who forces a disgraced author to interview her.
Pushed to the Edge of Survival is a drama, romance, and science fiction story about two unlikely people surviving a shipwreck and living with the consequences.
Cable Ties is a classic spy novel about two hunters discovering that government communications are being recorded and the ensuing FBI investigation.
These books are available in soft-cover on Amazon and eBook format everywhere.
Banning AI
When a society does not like something, we take steps to remove or curtail it. This effort might include a public information campaign, laws, and open discussions. This backlash is now occurring with Artificial Intelligence, and people want it regulated, banned, or limited to specific applications. I think this will be a hot topic in the coming elections, and lawmakers are working into the late hours to develop new laws.
What is the core problem? There are three main issues. The first is the fear that AI will replace learning. This issue is nothing new. I remember teachers being upset that I used a computer to write reports when they wanted a hand-written document. Before this, they were upset that I used a calculator for arithmetic. My father probably got scolded when he used a slide rule, and my grandfather for getting facts from books. Teachers would say, “You are not learning the hard way.”
The second problem is that computers and robots have replaced many jobs, such as auto assemblers and cashiers. Thus, it is natural to fear AI replacing jobs such as editors, writers, or teachers.
I certainly do not want to compete with AI, but that argument has flaws. People built (as part of their job) robots and computers. Once installed, technicians had to service them. Later, technicians had to upgrade or replace them with newer models. So, computers moved jobs from one group to another, but there is no denying that jobs got replaced.
The third reason is that AI will replace our souls. Chat GPT (an AI language program) can write just like a human, but there is a long way to go because AI can only do what we ask. “Write a story about a race car.” Only a human to ask the AI program to write about that topic. What about a random topic generator? Well, what use it that to you? Are you interested in the topic of industrial carrot processing?
We must also consider the output quality of a program like Chat GPT. Let’s ask a seasoned race car driver like Jackie Stewart a racing question. His answer would be based on learning how to dive, winning races, and making mistakes.
“Hey, Chat GPT. How do I drive my race car faster in corners?” AI can process every racing book, graph, chart, and race data. But an expert driver has raced, can see the entire picture, and look at the person as they answer. This thought process includes seeing the car, the track, the conditions, the driver’s body language, and the other drivers.
The answer might be a simple “use less brake before entering the turn” or a complex aerodynamics discussion. The human answer will be much more effective, appropriate, and valuable. However, the Chat GPT answer might have a better writing technique.
AI has upped the game, but we must remember what it was like when computers like the Macintosh introduced the graphical work environment. This invention was more intuitive, easier to use, and more powerful. “Soon, the Macintosh will take over our minds.”
People mostly understand my three talking points but still wish to turn back the clock with legislation. I would argue that the bomb had already exploded, and we must deal with the aftermath. Trying to apply laws to AI is like trying to un-explode a bomb.
The real problem is how best to use AI in our everyday life. This situation is like when my father purchased a personal computer for the family. My father and I used it, while my sister and mother did not.
Teachers, bosses, and workers have realized the dangers and advantages of this new technology. Some embrace it because it makes life easy, and others dislike what it has done.
I would also like to remind you we have tried to legislate away computers in the past and failed spectacularly. Look no further than 1990 Operation Sundevil:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operati...
I recall one legislator said (at the time) (I could not find a reference for the details), “A kid with a modem is more dangerous than a kid with a gun.” People were terrified of the coming computer revolution and what incredible damage was about to occur.
In conclusion, I think it is a better use of our time to embrace this new technology, find jobs for those laid off, and figure out how to use AI in our daily lives. But perhaps we could use AI to solve the very problem I have brought up. “Hey, Chat GPT. Please write a law banning the banning of AI.”
You’re the best -Bill
July 12, 2023
What is the core problem? There are three main issues. The first is the fear that AI will replace learning. This issue is nothing new. I remember teachers being upset that I used a computer to write reports when they wanted a hand-written document. Before this, they were upset that I used a calculator for arithmetic. My father probably got scolded when he used a slide rule, and my grandfather for getting facts from books. Teachers would say, “You are not learning the hard way.”
The second problem is that computers and robots have replaced many jobs, such as auto assemblers and cashiers. Thus, it is natural to fear AI replacing jobs such as editors, writers, or teachers.
I certainly do not want to compete with AI, but that argument has flaws. People built (as part of their job) robots and computers. Once installed, technicians had to service them. Later, technicians had to upgrade or replace them with newer models. So, computers moved jobs from one group to another, but there is no denying that jobs got replaced.
The third reason is that AI will replace our souls. Chat GPT (an AI language program) can write just like a human, but there is a long way to go because AI can only do what we ask. “Write a story about a race car.” Only a human to ask the AI program to write about that topic. What about a random topic generator? Well, what use it that to you? Are you interested in the topic of industrial carrot processing?
We must also consider the output quality of a program like Chat GPT. Let’s ask a seasoned race car driver like Jackie Stewart a racing question. His answer would be based on learning how to dive, winning races, and making mistakes.
“Hey, Chat GPT. How do I drive my race car faster in corners?” AI can process every racing book, graph, chart, and race data. But an expert driver has raced, can see the entire picture, and look at the person as they answer. This thought process includes seeing the car, the track, the conditions, the driver’s body language, and the other drivers.
The answer might be a simple “use less brake before entering the turn” or a complex aerodynamics discussion. The human answer will be much more effective, appropriate, and valuable. However, the Chat GPT answer might have a better writing technique.
AI has upped the game, but we must remember what it was like when computers like the Macintosh introduced the graphical work environment. This invention was more intuitive, easier to use, and more powerful. “Soon, the Macintosh will take over our minds.”
People mostly understand my three talking points but still wish to turn back the clock with legislation. I would argue that the bomb had already exploded, and we must deal with the aftermath. Trying to apply laws to AI is like trying to un-explode a bomb.
The real problem is how best to use AI in our everyday life. This situation is like when my father purchased a personal computer for the family. My father and I used it, while my sister and mother did not.
Teachers, bosses, and workers have realized the dangers and advantages of this new technology. Some embrace it because it makes life easy, and others dislike what it has done.
I would also like to remind you we have tried to legislate away computers in the past and failed spectacularly. Look no further than 1990 Operation Sundevil:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operati...
I recall one legislator said (at the time) (I could not find a reference for the details), “A kid with a modem is more dangerous than a kid with a gun.” People were terrified of the coming computer revolution and what incredible damage was about to occur.
In conclusion, I think it is a better use of our time to embrace this new technology, find jobs for those laid off, and figure out how to use AI in our daily lives. But perhaps we could use AI to solve the very problem I have brought up. “Hey, Chat GPT. Please write a law banning the banning of AI.”
You’re the best -Bill
July 12, 2023
Social Media Eliminated Christmas Cards
Society is rapidly changing every day. Newspapers are no longer delivered; bank tellers are ancient history, and supermarket cashiers are being phased out. Remember typewriters? How about the milkman? Designer jeans?
Most changes are positive, like the astounding things we can do on our phones, but I miss past activities like reading the Sunday comics or going to the toy store. I used to ride my dirt bike everywhere without a helmet. That was completely normal. Now, it is rare to see a pedal dirt bike. They are all electric things, with riders using their phones and not looking at the road. These are noticeable changes, but there is a less obvious trend that I want to discuss.
In the ‘70s, when I was growing up, it was essential for families to send out a Christmas card. In our house, the process started in January with the search for the perfect picture. My mother had us pose at every opportunity, and by December, we had at least six family pictures to choose from. In 1974, we took an old-time Western photograph. I still have it hanging on my wall. In 1977, we took a group family vacation to Lake Mead, and the kids found a massive mud hole. We all got covered, and somebody took our family picture. We were on vacation in Germany in 1983, and my mother made some random man take our picture in front of a giant clock. He thought we were crazy, and my father was afraid he would steal our camera.
Besides the photograph, there had to be a letter. It contained all the events during the year, family status, and other news. My mother tried to make them entertaining and funny. This translated into trivializing my accomplishments, and I still have bad memories.
Around 1995, I became an adult and sent out my Christmas cards, which were generic store-bought things. Picture? Letter? No way. My laziness even made me skip a few years. Then I got married, and we proudly continued the tradition. Costco made this super easy. On their website, you can upload a picture that gets turned into tasteful Christmas cards. Order 20, and put them into the included envelopes. Done!
This year, we decided not to send them out. Why? All our friends are on Facebook. Did something happen? Take an excellent picture? Do you have an opinion? Did you see something online? Post it all to Facebook, and bam! My friends instantly know all about our lives, and we know everything about them.
What is going on? “My friends know about me, and sending out a card is redundant.” Oh well, it was fun while it lasted, plus I am saving the environment. But is this progress? In the good/bad category, canceling the tradition is a tie.
You’re the best -Bill
March 06, 2024
Most changes are positive, like the astounding things we can do on our phones, but I miss past activities like reading the Sunday comics or going to the toy store. I used to ride my dirt bike everywhere without a helmet. That was completely normal. Now, it is rare to see a pedal dirt bike. They are all electric things, with riders using their phones and not looking at the road. These are noticeable changes, but there is a less obvious trend that I want to discuss.
In the ‘70s, when I was growing up, it was essential for families to send out a Christmas card. In our house, the process started in January with the search for the perfect picture. My mother had us pose at every opportunity, and by December, we had at least six family pictures to choose from. In 1974, we took an old-time Western photograph. I still have it hanging on my wall. In 1977, we took a group family vacation to Lake Mead, and the kids found a massive mud hole. We all got covered, and somebody took our family picture. We were on vacation in Germany in 1983, and my mother made some random man take our picture in front of a giant clock. He thought we were crazy, and my father was afraid he would steal our camera.
Besides the photograph, there had to be a letter. It contained all the events during the year, family status, and other news. My mother tried to make them entertaining and funny. This translated into trivializing my accomplishments, and I still have bad memories.
Around 1995, I became an adult and sent out my Christmas cards, which were generic store-bought things. Picture? Letter? No way. My laziness even made me skip a few years. Then I got married, and we proudly continued the tradition. Costco made this super easy. On their website, you can upload a picture that gets turned into tasteful Christmas cards. Order 20, and put them into the included envelopes. Done!
This year, we decided not to send them out. Why? All our friends are on Facebook. Did something happen? Take an excellent picture? Do you have an opinion? Did you see something online? Post it all to Facebook, and bam! My friends instantly know all about our lives, and we know everything about them.
What is going on? “My friends know about me, and sending out a card is redundant.” Oh well, it was fun while it lasted, plus I am saving the environment. But is this progress? In the good/bad category, canceling the tradition is a tie.
You’re the best -Bill
March 06, 2024
Is Proper English Still necessary?
When I was a young pup, all the students immediately grasped reading and writing. It looked so easy, but I struggled despite trying my best. Things began changing in the ninth grade, and I started making peace with grammar, spelling, and writing.
Why was mastering the English language so important? English? They ripped off the word from the name of a country. Lame. The answer is that we no longer solely depend on verbal words to communicate in our modern society. Instead, we write concepts on paper, enter them into a computer, or print them on a printing press. Written words have become the primary means of communication, information, computation, and understanding. Thus, it is necessary to have an agreed-upon format, and education forces students to follow these rules.
And the result is fantastic. “Today, I ate a red apple for breakfast.” There is no ambiguity in that sentence. Every single reader 100% understood exactly what information I intended to convey. And what a great sentence! Did you notice the capital letter at the beginning and the period at the end? How helpful! And that coma? Readers know exactly when to pause while speaking. Genius!
Professionals, employers, teachers, and readers expect/demand good sentence structure to work, communicate, understand, research, record, archive, share, debate, and absorb the content. Even if all the meaning is present, a poorly written sentence trips up the system because readers get confused. Sometimes, the error can be so bad that the confusion can only be resolved by contacting the author.
Finally, a well-written document is so much more impressive. It stands out as the mark of a true professional, and they can be proud of their creation. Proper documents power our modern world and prepare us for a fantastic future.
Well, it seems like I have summed things up neatly. Spelling, punctuation, and grammar are all essential for a functioning society. Nothing more to say. Yet… Some cracks are forming. Let’s start with the with our “solid foundation.” What is the standard set of rules for the English language? That’s easy. The Chicago Manual of Style. Obviously!
Umm, how many kids/adults even know about this book? Did the teacher bring it out in your first-grade class? No. Why not? Oh, it is too complex for kids. Now, hold on. Remember going to Sunday school as a kid to learn about religion? Yup, on the first day, some religious person tossed a Bible/Torah/Koran right at you, and you spent the next 10-100 years trying to figure out the meaning.
Have you read the Chicago Manual of Style? What a confusing mess! But it is perfect, right? Umm. Why is it on the seventeenth edition? Hmm, it sounds like the manual needed improving. And who decided the Chicago Manual of Style was the master default source? I never even heard of the thing until I was 50.
It used to be that when you bought a car, you jumped in and drove off. The Lexus we purchased five years ago has FIVE manuals. The owner’s manual is 907 pages, and the entertainment/navigation system is 416 pages. Is it necessary to read all that? If you want to understand how to navigate, it sure is.
According to Toner Buzz:
• Each year, 500,000 to 1 million new books come out.
• Including self-published authors, the count reaches close to 4 million new book titles each year.
• In 2021, there were about 2.3 million new self-published books in the US, marking a decline compared to the preceding two years.
https://www.tonerbuzz.com/blog/how-ma...
Plus there is internet information, prior published books, newspapers, magazines, textbooks, journals, letters, and advertisements. They even have entire buildings filled with books, called libraries. What is a library? Dang, you will have to go to the library, to get a dictionary to look up that word.
It is all too much, and something must give. Quality. Yes, the effort we put into writing quality has begun to slip. Now, English errors are more common and get less attention.
Speaking of introducing errors, we now have a new player. Yes, Artificial Intelligence is now in the typeset seat. Yay! Need to create a 1000-word report about George Washington? ChatGPT: Create a 1000-word report about the life and history of George Washington. Done! And the result will read well. Very well! But… ChatGPT is not a person. It makes weird mistakes, gets repetitive, confusing, wordy, and produces incorrect results. But the grammar/spelling and punctuation is fantastic. Right?
ChatGPT created sentences that look good with a quick review, but I see flaws when I study sentence structure. (Note: I do not use ChatGPT for writing. I do use it for a story idea sounding board.) The funny thing is that ChatGPT is getting worse. It blabbers on about nonsense and gets into strange side tangents. I have spotted two glaring spelling mistakes.
We have another problem: Spell/grammar checkers. Wow, they have changed my life. I love Grammarly, ProWritingAid, Thesarus.com, Dictonary.com, Wikipedia, and random name generators. Astounding! And I can even hire a ghostwriter, beta reader, or copy editor. They charge by the word. Just like Uber charges by the mile!
What happens when these incredible resources disagree? All those tools are synchronized to the latest edition of The Chicago Manual of Style, The Modern Language Association of America handbook, and the Oxford Dictionary. Right? They are not? What? How can that be? They do their own thing because nobody can agree upon the rules. Know what is worse? Besides America, other countries speak English, and their rules differ.
Plus, there is a new player: social media and streaming sites. We used to get all our essential information from written sources like textbooks, manuals, guides, reference books, or data sheets. Let’s say I want to remove the engine from my car. I used to go to the library and check out one or more books on automotive repair. Then, I would search for the chapter on engine removal and follow the steps. The manual will include important cautions, tips, warnings, and pictures/diagrams.
Now, I search YouTube for “engine removal” and then watch the informative video. If I do not like the video, I click on another. What is the problem? YouTube viewers will listen to a person naturally speaking without a script, and there will be many grammatical errors. This means that hearing verbal errors is becoming more acceptable, which translates to writing errors being more acceptable.
Now for the most significant attack on the English language. Kids text all day and night. Punctuation is actively frowned upon, and kids intentionally misspell words. Teachers are completely overwhelmed, and they have another problem.
Popular social agendas have ruined the education system, and politicians are introducing programs without trials or public input. For example, my daughter graduated from a high school with the “No Child Left Behind” program. Wow, that sounds impressive.
What did this program replace? They used to have an Advanced Placement class for the smart kids, a regular class, and a class to help the struggling kids. Now, they throw them together with the idea that the smart kids will help struggling kids.
Result? Group tests, projects, and homework. My daughter was placed with three average kids and two struggles. So, she would do the work while the others play on their phones. Even when she asks for their input, they refuse to help. A+ for everyone! What does this mean? This means that chimps learning sign language get a better education than five out of six kids.
It gets worse. Because the administrators at her high school spent all their money on giving themselves raises, they must cheap out as much as possible. So, they use open-source (free) software instead of industry-standard programs. Do companies use open-source programs? No, because they must administer their employees, open-source programs are nearly impossible to control, secure, or maintain.
Now, I must pivot. I got my latest book back from my copy editor and have been reviewing the edits. My guy is fantastic and uncovered so many errors I never would have spotted. Wonderful!
Well, I found a significant error that the copy editor missed. See if you can spot it. This is a dialog between two characters:
“I try.”
“Stop being so modest and take the compliment,” Kim chided,
“Alright.”
I ended a sentence with a comma and not a period. This mistake is easy to miss because a comma and a period look similar. Side note: Grammarly, Microsoft Word, and ProWritingAid also missed it. Boo!
This error is big enough for a bus to drive through. And I was even more upset because I caught the mistake after reviewing the document several times. But then I thought about the reality of the situation. Was my mistake that bad?
I see spelling mistakes on massive billboards, gobbledygook from bestselling authors, and text messages that are so bad that I cannot make heads or tails of them. My comma mix-up was a minor boo-boo—no big deal.
Yet, I remained angry. “I should have caught this! My editor should have caught this! Hey, you messed up, Grammarly, Microsoft Word, and ProWritingAid!”
Am I writing this article to give myself a pass? No, quite the opposite. Today, there are more tools than ever to correct English flaws. Plus, the internet provides a vast resource for properly learning English, and the rules are better documented than ever. So, there is no excuse for improper English.
Yet… Have you read a book review lately? I often see comments like: “Needed editing.” “I spotted six spelling errors in the first chapter.” “Did a sixth grader write this?” “They used ChatGPT to write the entire book.”
And there is a final smack in the face. It has taken me a lifetime of struggling to attain basic English skills. Now that I can appreciate finely crafted sentences (I love you, Neil Gaiman!!!), everything has turned to junk.
My question remains. How upset should I be by my comma mistake? So many people discourage proper English, and a well-written sentence looks out of place. My answer is that I will try my best, but this feels like a battle where I am the only one who cares about the outcome.
You’re the best -Bill
September 11, 2024
Why was mastering the English language so important? English? They ripped off the word from the name of a country. Lame. The answer is that we no longer solely depend on verbal words to communicate in our modern society. Instead, we write concepts on paper, enter them into a computer, or print them on a printing press. Written words have become the primary means of communication, information, computation, and understanding. Thus, it is necessary to have an agreed-upon format, and education forces students to follow these rules.
And the result is fantastic. “Today, I ate a red apple for breakfast.” There is no ambiguity in that sentence. Every single reader 100% understood exactly what information I intended to convey. And what a great sentence! Did you notice the capital letter at the beginning and the period at the end? How helpful! And that coma? Readers know exactly when to pause while speaking. Genius!
Professionals, employers, teachers, and readers expect/demand good sentence structure to work, communicate, understand, research, record, archive, share, debate, and absorb the content. Even if all the meaning is present, a poorly written sentence trips up the system because readers get confused. Sometimes, the error can be so bad that the confusion can only be resolved by contacting the author.
Finally, a well-written document is so much more impressive. It stands out as the mark of a true professional, and they can be proud of their creation. Proper documents power our modern world and prepare us for a fantastic future.
Well, it seems like I have summed things up neatly. Spelling, punctuation, and grammar are all essential for a functioning society. Nothing more to say. Yet… Some cracks are forming. Let’s start with the with our “solid foundation.” What is the standard set of rules for the English language? That’s easy. The Chicago Manual of Style. Obviously!
Umm, how many kids/adults even know about this book? Did the teacher bring it out in your first-grade class? No. Why not? Oh, it is too complex for kids. Now, hold on. Remember going to Sunday school as a kid to learn about religion? Yup, on the first day, some religious person tossed a Bible/Torah/Koran right at you, and you spent the next 10-100 years trying to figure out the meaning.
Have you read the Chicago Manual of Style? What a confusing mess! But it is perfect, right? Umm. Why is it on the seventeenth edition? Hmm, it sounds like the manual needed improving. And who decided the Chicago Manual of Style was the master default source? I never even heard of the thing until I was 50.
It used to be that when you bought a car, you jumped in and drove off. The Lexus we purchased five years ago has FIVE manuals. The owner’s manual is 907 pages, and the entertainment/navigation system is 416 pages. Is it necessary to read all that? If you want to understand how to navigate, it sure is.
According to Toner Buzz:
• Each year, 500,000 to 1 million new books come out.
• Including self-published authors, the count reaches close to 4 million new book titles each year.
• In 2021, there were about 2.3 million new self-published books in the US, marking a decline compared to the preceding two years.
https://www.tonerbuzz.com/blog/how-ma...
Plus there is internet information, prior published books, newspapers, magazines, textbooks, journals, letters, and advertisements. They even have entire buildings filled with books, called libraries. What is a library? Dang, you will have to go to the library, to get a dictionary to look up that word.
It is all too much, and something must give. Quality. Yes, the effort we put into writing quality has begun to slip. Now, English errors are more common and get less attention.
Speaking of introducing errors, we now have a new player. Yes, Artificial Intelligence is now in the typeset seat. Yay! Need to create a 1000-word report about George Washington? ChatGPT: Create a 1000-word report about the life and history of George Washington. Done! And the result will read well. Very well! But… ChatGPT is not a person. It makes weird mistakes, gets repetitive, confusing, wordy, and produces incorrect results. But the grammar/spelling and punctuation is fantastic. Right?
ChatGPT created sentences that look good with a quick review, but I see flaws when I study sentence structure. (Note: I do not use ChatGPT for writing. I do use it for a story idea sounding board.) The funny thing is that ChatGPT is getting worse. It blabbers on about nonsense and gets into strange side tangents. I have spotted two glaring spelling mistakes.
We have another problem: Spell/grammar checkers. Wow, they have changed my life. I love Grammarly, ProWritingAid, Thesarus.com, Dictonary.com, Wikipedia, and random name generators. Astounding! And I can even hire a ghostwriter, beta reader, or copy editor. They charge by the word. Just like Uber charges by the mile!
What happens when these incredible resources disagree? All those tools are synchronized to the latest edition of The Chicago Manual of Style, The Modern Language Association of America handbook, and the Oxford Dictionary. Right? They are not? What? How can that be? They do their own thing because nobody can agree upon the rules. Know what is worse? Besides America, other countries speak English, and their rules differ.
Plus, there is a new player: social media and streaming sites. We used to get all our essential information from written sources like textbooks, manuals, guides, reference books, or data sheets. Let’s say I want to remove the engine from my car. I used to go to the library and check out one or more books on automotive repair. Then, I would search for the chapter on engine removal and follow the steps. The manual will include important cautions, tips, warnings, and pictures/diagrams.
Now, I search YouTube for “engine removal” and then watch the informative video. If I do not like the video, I click on another. What is the problem? YouTube viewers will listen to a person naturally speaking without a script, and there will be many grammatical errors. This means that hearing verbal errors is becoming more acceptable, which translates to writing errors being more acceptable.
Now for the most significant attack on the English language. Kids text all day and night. Punctuation is actively frowned upon, and kids intentionally misspell words. Teachers are completely overwhelmed, and they have another problem.
Popular social agendas have ruined the education system, and politicians are introducing programs without trials or public input. For example, my daughter graduated from a high school with the “No Child Left Behind” program. Wow, that sounds impressive.
What did this program replace? They used to have an Advanced Placement class for the smart kids, a regular class, and a class to help the struggling kids. Now, they throw them together with the idea that the smart kids will help struggling kids.
Result? Group tests, projects, and homework. My daughter was placed with three average kids and two struggles. So, she would do the work while the others play on their phones. Even when she asks for their input, they refuse to help. A+ for everyone! What does this mean? This means that chimps learning sign language get a better education than five out of six kids.
It gets worse. Because the administrators at her high school spent all their money on giving themselves raises, they must cheap out as much as possible. So, they use open-source (free) software instead of industry-standard programs. Do companies use open-source programs? No, because they must administer their employees, open-source programs are nearly impossible to control, secure, or maintain.
Now, I must pivot. I got my latest book back from my copy editor and have been reviewing the edits. My guy is fantastic and uncovered so many errors I never would have spotted. Wonderful!
Well, I found a significant error that the copy editor missed. See if you can spot it. This is a dialog between two characters:
“I try.”
“Stop being so modest and take the compliment,” Kim chided,
“Alright.”
I ended a sentence with a comma and not a period. This mistake is easy to miss because a comma and a period look similar. Side note: Grammarly, Microsoft Word, and ProWritingAid also missed it. Boo!
This error is big enough for a bus to drive through. And I was even more upset because I caught the mistake after reviewing the document several times. But then I thought about the reality of the situation. Was my mistake that bad?
I see spelling mistakes on massive billboards, gobbledygook from bestselling authors, and text messages that are so bad that I cannot make heads or tails of them. My comma mix-up was a minor boo-boo—no big deal.
Yet, I remained angry. “I should have caught this! My editor should have caught this! Hey, you messed up, Grammarly, Microsoft Word, and ProWritingAid!”
Am I writing this article to give myself a pass? No, quite the opposite. Today, there are more tools than ever to correct English flaws. Plus, the internet provides a vast resource for properly learning English, and the rules are better documented than ever. So, there is no excuse for improper English.
Yet… Have you read a book review lately? I often see comments like: “Needed editing.” “I spotted six spelling errors in the first chapter.” “Did a sixth grader write this?” “They used ChatGPT to write the entire book.”
And there is a final smack in the face. It has taken me a lifetime of struggling to attain basic English skills. Now that I can appreciate finely crafted sentences (I love you, Neil Gaiman!!!), everything has turned to junk.
My question remains. How upset should I be by my comma mistake? So many people discourage proper English, and a well-written sentence looks out of place. My answer is that I will try my best, but this feels like a battle where I am the only one who cares about the outcome.
You’re the best -Bill
September 11, 2024
