Seeing and avoiding Peak Conformity

Copilot helps me reach Peak Conformity

Microsoft word has upgraded to include an AI program called Copilot. Since I potentially will be teaching Short Story Writing next fall, I tried it out to see what I’ll be facing.

First, I asked it to write a quirky love scene. I’ve written about writing quirky love scenes vs AI love scenes and an AI bot has stalked my blog.  What I got was nothing like what I might write however, as the characters are too stock and the language too ordinary. However, if it was more developed with sensory details, I’d probably give it a B.  

Here it is:

As if on cue, the AI suggested a love scene set in a bustling coffee shop. She imagined two characters, both engrossed in their books, colliding as they reached for the same caffeine fix. Their eyes met over a spilt latte, and laughter bubbled up despite the mess. He offered to buy her a new drink, and soon they were deep in conversation, discovering a shared love for obscure sci-fi novels and bad puns. By the time their cups were empty, they had planned their first date to a quirky bookstore downtown. It was a charmingly chaotic start, fitting for a pair brought together by a combination of coffee stains and serendipity.

Next, I asked it to complete a scene in the novel I’m working on. I’ve been quite slow about writing this one, Book 2 in a series. I asked it to write about two characters resistant to taking off an article of clothing. The program captured details from the previous scene, in which the main character, Gormley, is sent to work at a fertilizer plant as a clandestine spy.  She meets a worker with his jaw covered and suspects it has much to do with the poison and attempts to get a closer look.

Co-pilot came up with this:

His eyes narrowed with suspicion. 

“This isn’t about trust,” I sighed, frustrated. “It’s about your health. Isn’t that more important?”

He shook his head stubbornly. “Not if it means exposing myself to you. I’ve got my pride. I won’t compromise my dignity.” 

 It’s stock, uncreative, and clearly favoring the enemies to lovers trope, but it did give me an idea of expanding the scene. Again, it’s sparse, like Hemmingway, and standard but I’ve read things like this. For someone wanting to stay in the “familiar” it’s okay.

Next, I asked it to add humor. Here goes;

He hesitated, then slowly, as if it pained him, he tugged his collar down to reveal his jaw. The sight was shocking. His skin was red and inflamed, with patches of what looked like chemical burns.

I winced, trying to keep my reaction to myself. “That looks serious. How long has it been like this?” I asked, reaching out to examine the area without touching it.

“A few weeks,” he admitted, his voice a mix of embarrassment and defiance. “I thought it would get better on its own.”

“Clearly, it hasn’t,” I said, frowning. “You need more than just salve. This looks like a reaction to something you’re exposed to regularly. Does your work involve handling chemicals without proper protection?”

He nodded reluctantly. “Yeah, you could say that. But I can’t afford to be picky about jobs.”

“Well, you need to be careful. This could get worse,” I said, my concern evident. “Have you tried using any protective gear?”

He shrugged. “Sometimes, but it gets in the way.”

“Not as much as this,” I pointed out, gesturing to his jaw. “You need to take care of yourself. Your health is more important than any job.”

He sighed, the weight of my words sinking in. “I know, but it’s not that easy.”

“Nothing worthwhile ever is,” I said softly. “We’ll start with the salve and see if it helps. But you need to promise me you’ll be more cautious. Deal?”

He nodded, a small smile lifting the corners of his mouth. “Deal. Thanks for the salve. And for the advice.”

“You’re welcome,” I said, relieved. “Now, let’s get you patched up.”

As I applied the salve to his jaw, I couldn’t help but feel a sense of hope. Maybe this was the first step in helping him turn things around. Only time would tell.

I highlighted a part which resembles something I might have written it on my own, minus the part about nodding. Nodding, shrugging, sighing, and smirking are overused gestures, small smiles.  They are, it seems, part of AI writing. 

I asked Copilot to add setting details. It reads as if Copilot has taken in a lot of steam-punk but it does add some vague and foreboding details of setting, which is good. It also adds more head nodding and it is really fixated on the “time will tell” line. In other words, AI brings about a sense of conformity to writing. One problem is, young writers often dwell in the land of conformity as they seek to fit in with their peers. Conformity lessens disagreement, or in the case of an author, lessens the chance of a bad review.  As with Copilot, conformity teaches social expectations.  Conformity can teach social norms. It can lead to a polarized society with an in and an out group, and in the case of Copilot, dampen aesthetics and bring about a certain dullness. Where are the figures of speech? Where is the originality?

We stepped outside the small clinic, the harsh midday sun beating down on us. The air was heavy with the unmistakable odor of chemicals, a constant reminder of the fertilizer plant nearby. The plant’s towering silos and sprawling pipelines dominated the landscape, casting long shadows over the surrounding area.

A group of workers in worn-out overalls and stained gloves trudged by, their faces etched with fatigue. The rhythmic hum of machinery filled the air, punctuated by the occasional hiss of steam or the distant clang of metal.

“You work here, don’t you?” I asked, breaking the silence.

He nodded, his gaze fixed on the plant. “Yeah, it’s not the best place, but it’s work. And work is hard to come by these days.”

As he walked away, disappearing into the sea of workers, I hoped he would take the advice to heart. The plant loomed behind him, a symbol of both livelihood and hazard. Only time would tell if he could find a balance between the two.

I fully subscribe to the Edgar Allen Poe school of fiction writing, in which you embrace some strangeness. Fortunately, my genre also embraces strangeness. However, I’m sure I’ve already been reading AI generated content in the news especially when it comes to tips such as how to paint your bathroom.  

We’ve got a saying in analytical chemistry:  an experiment can’t be any better than the sample itself. AI takes samples of writing from on-line content. Meta’s AI has taken two of my novels. For all you thinkers, keep putting out quality thoughts, keep thinking. AI can’t be any better than you are but it can be worse. It can make mistakes and push bad ideas. 

Will the conformity of AI make us all less unique and more dulled? Only time will tell. 

Above: seen in Detroit near Eastern Market

Lessons in Alchemy

One of my favorite monsters is Frankenstein’s monster, the guy created by the scientist Victor Frankenstein from assembled body parts and brought to life by a spark of lightning. The careless scientist was hoping to bring his dear mother back to life. You can’t blame a guy for trying. But he violated a rule of science–he worked alone. The hapless creature he made was created in secret. Only alchemists work in secret. Although alchemists came up with some still used techniques such as distillation, their results aren’t reliable, reproducible, or even understandable.  Some of their ingredients included “thoughts and prayers.” They’ve failed “peer review.” They weren’t necessarily mad scientists, just bad scientists.

The rules of new science are:

Never work alone in lab.

Keep a carefully detailed lab notebook.

Share your results with others so they can be verified and reproduced.

Thus, to work in secret is to bring about all sorts of trouble. In 1818 when the novel Frankenstein was published, scientists in Mary Shelley’s native England and in other countries close to them culturally were just beginning to move away from alchemy.  Understanding electricity was the new hot topic. Batteries made from two metals and an electrolyte were a breakthrough in Italy. In the US, Benjamin Franklin established that lightning was a huge static charge and that it was attracted to tall pointy objects. No more would people see a lightning strike as being the hand of an angry God. It was Mother Nature. 

Inspired by electric eels and frog legs jumping between the poles of a battery, humans hoped that electricity could “reanimate” dead things. Shocking executed people to see if they would revive was tried unsuccessfully.   

As for Frankenstein’s creature, he turned out to be intelligent and sensitive, but without parental guidance. He resorted to menacing his creator once he had been firmly rejected and had no companion to turn to. Like all great writing, Frankenstein says something about the human condition. The novel makes a statement on nature and nurture and the cruelty of judging and rejecting someone based on their appearance.

Yet here we are, facing the same kind of science that made the creature and made him lose his mind. 

Project 2025, the sweeping right-wing blueprint for a new kind of U.S. presidency, is here. It will sabotage science-based policies that address climate change, the environment, abortion, health care access, technology and education...and even cancer research. The government funds 40% of basic science, science done to advance knowledge and improve health, and the research is shared with the public and other scientists. In fact Obama made sure all of us can access federally funded research. Now, scientific research is on the chopping block.

If Congress agrees to the cuts and to the foolish idea of replacing government scientists with many years of experience with political loyalists, expect to see bad science. Scientific growth requires autonomy of thought. (This isn’t the same as technological growth.) No doubt other countries will take the lead in basic science research and could share information with our scientists if they are allowed. Corporations will do their research and patent it but it won’t be basic science and it won’t be public. 

As an indicator of things to come, a panel of non-expert politicians recently declared that COVID came from a lab, something most scientists don’t see evidence for, and that Trump did a great job handling it. (A prestigious science journal published results saying the US delayed acting on the Covid -19 virus, setting the vaccine development back. Are you one of those people who think the virus came from a lab? Scientists don’t agree with that.)

This is the kind of “king pleasing” science done before science was real. It’s more like alchemy.Alchemists and kings frequently crossed paths in history because kings really wanted to turn less valuable metals into gold. This can be simulated by plating reactions such as this one and is probably how alchemists appeased his highness. Of course, not everyone was convinced and for a good reason. I’ve even written a futuristic novel on this theme

You could say that science in the hands of politicians and loyalists is akin to an unsupervised child. It could become a monster or maybe just make a mess. We’ll see.