I fully realize how a lot of artists feel about AI-generated stuff and I think a lot of that is quite valid. I have used ChatGPT for coding stuff and overall I think it's 1. One of the most significant technology advances in how we can process information since probably the Google Search engine and 2. Massively overhyped in terms of achieving AGI or ending modern knowledge-work as we know it.&nbsp;<br /><br />I still thought this was an interesting experiment in using text-generation for an NBM-type story. It's ~8,000 words and took just a few hours! Edited a bit for formatting, which is still probably whacky, since I wrote it in Markdown, but other than that the prompts and responses are just copy-pasted over. ChatGPT made a few obvious logical mistakes too, which kind of breaks the story, but I left those bits in.<br /><br />Overall it's an interesting paradigm -- I wrote this in what was probably a tenth of the time an equivalent-length story would have taken me. I also think ChatGPT writes like a total cornball and none of this writing quality isn't even close to what I'd want a "Cheesium story" to be. However this allowed me to get this story made just by thinking of "okay what comes next" instead of wrangling lots and lots of text to tell a coherent series of events, dialogue, characters, etc, so in some ways it's a more freewheeling and fun kind of storytelling. It even had a few unexpected "ideas" that appeared that I maybe wouldn't have thought of on my own.<br /><br />Overall I'm kind of curious how this comes across for readers. Does knowing text is from a fancy autocomplete-engine diminish the enjoyment from reading it? Are the ideas in the story more interesting even with the lower-tier writing quality? Does the volume of new content make up for the lack of quality? Happy to hear feedback.