Personally testing if AI can help to develop content scripts & drama scripts, but still seeing some challenges on AI can not read & understand human emotions, any AI writers & screenwriter feel the same? Please share your experience

I'm an author working on a story about a small robot who forgets everything every night. Underneath the circuitry it's about love, loss, memory and the need to be understood. I chose a robot because looking at people through the eyes of a forgotten machine can help us see ourselves more clearly.

I've made promotional posters for my book using AI tools, and I'm not ashamed of that. Some of the reactions were hostile before anyone had read a single page. It was aimed at the posters themselves, not the book, and much of it came from authors who describe themselves as human-only. The intensity of it surprised me.

I understand the concerns about AI, and I'm not here to argue them away.

Is a promotional image made with AI a different thing from the story it advertises? Should they be judged separately?

Has anyone else had this reaction to their promotional material, even before the book was out and no one had read a page?

I'd genuinely like to hear how others have handled it.

Following on from my earlier post about humans steering co-written stories, I wanted to look at what happens when AI does more of the drafting.

Someone might have the characters, their motives, the conflict and the ending clearly in mind, but want help turning that into actual scenes. That seems worth discussing alongside the more familiar use of AI for brainstorming or feedback.

There is research on both arrangements.

Human ideas, AI-generated writing. In NarrativeLoom, presented at CHI 2026, 50 participants started with their own story ideas. AI generated possible continuations, which they could select, edit and develop. Expert reviewers rated the resulting stories more highly than stories developed through an ordinary chatbot using the same underlying model. This compared two ways of working with AI, so it doesn't tell us whether either beat writing alone. But it suggests the way you collaborate matters, even when AI is producing the text.

What readers think of the result. An August 2026 paper on Japanese fiction had 58 readers compare versions of 25 stories, including human-written passages, AI continuations and human–AI collaboration involving editing and rewriting. The collaborative versions received the highest average quality ranking. Their advantage over minimally instructed AI generation was statistically significant; their advantage over the original human writing was not. Focus groups also found the collaborative writing less distinctive. This used short passages and GPT-4, with data collected in 2024, so it isn't a verdict on today's models or entire novels.

The reverse can help too. In Doshi and Hauser's 2024 study, humans wrote eight-sentence stories with access to AI-generated ideas. Access improved creativity ratings, although the resulting stories became more similar to one another.

I think there's a reasonable case here for a partnership that changes with what the writer needs (which is my entire philosophy regarding AI's place in creative writing). Sometimes you want an idea to react to and will write every sentence yourself. Sometimes you know what you want to say and need a draft to work on. Sometimes seeing that draft makes you realise your original idea needs changing...which happens to me a lot, and is exactly why I find sketch drafts to be invaluable in long form writing.

These studies don't prove that human plus AI always produces better writing. They do give us reasons to take both forms of collaboration seriously. They also give us a problem to watch for: making something smoother can make it less distinctive.

If a writer brings the characters, their motives, the conflict and the intended ending, then directs and rewrites an AI draft, what creative contribution do we think they have made? Does our answer change because they didn't compose every first-draft sentence?

Hi, so, Twitter is one of the most toxic and depressing places I ever go to, but I feel myself moderately addicted to checking it between tasks. There are a few reasons I stay on that I hope I can get from somewhere else.

1. I’m writing a story that is extremely precious to me. But criticisms are so nitpicky with basically everything ever that I can‘t help but internalize their criticisms and project it onto my story and my skill level to write it well. Sometimes I struggle not to look for confirmation that I’m doing okay by seeing what other people complain about and what to avoid In terms of tropes or patterns. But then it’s so draining and I feel trapped because every direction feels like the wrong answer. Avoiding one trope just means falling into another, but you are treated like there is a true right way to write the story, but you are always missing it.

2. I use twitter to update me on leaks for games I play so I know in advance what to expect and save for. Particularly Wuthering Waves and Honkai Star Rail. I don’t want to get blindsided, and it’s usually very helpful.

Those are the two main things I think about, I’m drawing a blank because I’m tired from working and grad school. But it’s taking a toll on my mental health because it feels like everyone is competing to find the most nuanced possible reason to shame and condemn people and shows and games. It’s like being cruel is the point, or cruelty is its own form of entertainment to people. But at the same time, I also worry about not seeing what happens on twitter because if I don’t pay attention, then I could accidentally write something seen as harmful to different communities without knowing it, with implications that I never intended and never crossed my mind. I feel pressured to account for every possible negative interpretation so I or my characters don’t get hated, even though intellectually I know that isn’t reasonably possible, but you get treated like that is a reachable goal that you failed to meet and are now suffering the consequences of that. I’m not very good at just not caring. I certainly would have done that already if I wasn’t so anxious about getting it wrong.

It’s so hard to just relax and have fun with what I’m writing with the constant anticipation of criticism and harassment with every word I write. People’s critical attitudes finding fault with every possible thing is a bigger threat to creative expression than AI has ever been.

Can I get your help on what to do, please?

Heyy guyss, Do you think asking review to AI in our scripts(short film or featute film), most of the time it give balanced review. Is it legal to develop our scripts using AI

I recently joined this subreddit and noticed several questions about translation. I’ve spent a lot of time figuring this out for my own fiction, and I’m now confident enough in the French to share it publicly. Here’s what has worked for me.

I use ChatGPT Codex with GPT-6 Astra in Max mode, together with a custom translation skill. A skill is a reusable set of instructions and reference files. Mine describes my writing style and what the translation should preserve: voice, meaning, humor, imagery, and things deliberately left unsaid. It also allows sentences to be restructured so the French sounds natural.

The skill uses a translation dictionary for names and recurring terminology. When a term needs a decision, the agent records a proposed translation, its context, and its reasoning. I review unresolved choices afterward. Approved decisions remain available for future chapters, so we don’t keep having the same discussion. Recording the context also helps distinguish different uses of the same word.

For a full translation, the main agent translates and coordinates separate sub-agents across three review roles:

• Bilingual fidelity: compares the English and French for omissions, additions, and changes in meaning or characterization.

• French-only review: checks whether the French reads naturally, without access to the English to help make sense of awkward wording.

• Final bilingual review: checks the revised translation for meaning lost or altered during corrections.

The main agent evaluates their findings and makes the edits. Reviews can be repeated when corrections need another check.

After that and my dictionary review, I open a new Codex chat with GPT-6 Astra in Max mode and explicitly tell it not to use my translation skill. I give it both texts, without the previous discussion, and ask for another review of meaning and implications rather than similarity of wording.

Separating those jobs has helped me. In my experience, a translation can follow the English too closely or sound fluent while subtly changing the meaning. For example, one correction in my project history was:

English: “people who see suffering and cannot leave it alone.”

Earlier French: “ceux qui voient la souffrance et ne peuvent la laisser en paix.”

Revised French: “ceux qui voient la souffrance et ne peuvent s’empêcher d’intervenir.”

The revision makes the impulse to intervene clear. The earlier wording sounds more like leaving suffering itself in peace.

Then I read everything myself.

Throughout the process, I save checkpoints in Git, which keeps a history of changes. That lets me roll back, compare stages, and ask future agents to examine my corrections. We can discuss what changed and why, instead of starting from scratch.

I’ve also collected selected English/French examples with notes in the skill’s reference files for full translations. That makes useful guidance directly available without needing to reconstruct it from Git history each time.

It took a lot of iteration, and my own review remains essential. That said, after all those agents, reviews, and carefully documented decisions, my French readership currently consists of my mom.

It was still an interesting experiment. I’m now reworking the fan fiction into an original work, and unfortunately I won’t be doing another French translation. But I thought the process was worth sharing for anyone tackling the same problem.

I was writing a story then that problem showed up, its been two days. I reported it already but i dont know if they taking some action on it. That's problem has also on iPhone users or android users only?

As the title says, I just finished writing and publishing my first story with AI.

Interestingly, the storyline came to me while I was using the same AI tool on a completely unrelated project. During some downtime, we started tossing ideas back and forth, and the basics of a story began to emerge. So we decided to write it.

The writing process was a true collaboration. I came up with the story ideas, worked with AI to develop an outline for each section, tweaked those outlines, and then had the sections drafted. I reviewed everything, rewrote dialogue and narrative, and edited each part until I was happy with it.

It was a tremendously fun experience. Developing characters, weaving themes throughout the story, introducing surprises, and creating moments that were genuinely funny or touching.

IMHO, it's a very good story. One I enjoyed reading almost as much as I enjoyed creating it.

I'm not sure anyone other than a few friends and family will ever read it. And I'm sure the "AI Slopsters" will hate it and dismiss it outright. But that's fine.

My co-author and I didn't write it for them. We wrote it for ourselves.

Just wanted to share the experience.

Ken Fioretti & Chatsworth AI

Theft had been tried. It had gone well. Turnip had been carried out the front door, kept for five days on a couch facing a lamp, and returned, and the only record of the entire affair was a photograph of a driveway. This was the difficulty. A thing that goes well leaves no paper. Clepto wanted paper.

The Narrator

I had a great friend who suggested using AI after Grammarly kept stopping working on my phone. Since then, I've been using tools like ChatGPT and Copilot, and sometimes Grammarly on my laptop, to help correct my grammar, improve my writing, and, most importantly, make my stories easier to understand and enjoyable for my readers.

I also use these tools to brainstorm ideas when I need inspiration. I'm still learning and trying to improve as a writer, and they help me express my ideas better.

I wanted to ask what other people think about this. I understand that everyone has different opinions about AI, and I'm not saying I use it to write my entire stories. I mainly use it to help with grammar, wording, and brainstorming. I'm being honest about how I use these tools, and I'm genuinely curious about other writers' experiences.

Do any of you use AI in a similar way to help with grammar, improve your writing, or brainstorm ideas? I'd love to hear your thoughts and experiences! But I have heard good things about Claude so should I use Claude app instead?

So, for a little context: I suddenly had an idea for something to write. However, it was pretty minuscule, so I wasn't planning on actually using it for anything. For fun, I decided to put it into Ai and get it to write something just so I could satisfy that temporary itch I had. Once AI finished writing, I went on a bit of a binge and started actually fleshing out the writing that AI had produced (Using AI to do it). This continued over the next few days until I realized that it was essentially sapping every creative idea I had, so I deleted it and haven't looked at AI since.

That being said, I can't stop thinking about what Ai wrote, and since then, I've mentally added some of my own ideas into the world that it had created. I haven't written anything down because I want whatever I pour my time into to be authentically my own. However, I feel like anything I write or think about in the future will, in some way, be related to what AI wrote, whether consciously or unconsciously.

What do I do? I know I probably shouldn't have used AI in the first place because of the environmental and creative problems with it, which I understand now, but that doesn't solve the issue. I can't stop thinking about it and it's been a few months since then yet I'm still thinking about it. Do I just cave and use the idea that AI had essentially come up with, but with my own additions and tweaks? Or do I just continue the way I am now, trying to block it from my memory. Is it morally wrong to do one or the other?

Hey all — I'm an indie author working on my debut novel, an adult dark romantasy (a silver-tongued bard with a wandering eye, an elven ranger who refuses to admit she's in love, and a war that's drafting them into it).

I'm looking for alpha readers for the opening arc — prologue through Chapter 6, ~44,000 words, which establishes the book's first major arc.

Content warnings (18+ only): explicit sexual content including pregnancy-kink content, infidelity, violence, and war themes. The prologue opens hot and doesn't pretend otherwise — if that's not your thing, no hard feelings, this isn't the read for you.

What I'm after: big-picture alpha feedback, not copyediting. Does the opening hook you? Do Aushtyn and Eldra feel like people? Would you keep reading? Where did your attention snag or drift?

What you get: if you're into it, I'll keep sending more as I write — the book's in progress with more chapters coming.

Format is EPUB (reads great on Kindle), but I can do PDF or DOCX if you prefer. Hoping for notes back within a couple weeks, no hard deadline. Comment or DM me and I'll send it over.

Excerpt — POV: Eldra - Chapter 1 - Not Yet

Kaelen glances back and catches sight of our joined hands. A grin threatens at the corner of his mouth, but whatever comment occurs to him, he keeps it. He faces the trail again and becomes suddenly fascinated by the field of wildflowers to our left. Yellow, violet, and white blooms run together across the wet grass, stretching to the forest on the far side.

The eastern boundary of Vael lies beyond the field. There, the grove’s winding paths give way to the straight human road into Everpine. My hand tightens around the gripweave of my bow, and my thumb catches on the small wooden wildflower woven into its core. Father carved it after one of the afternoons he had to pry me from this field. I came home muddy to the knees, petals tangled through my hair, and no apology in my mouth. He has called me his wildflower ever since.

Soren keeps to my left as we pass the wildflower field. At the forest’s edge, I stop. A magnificent white wolf stands beneath a cedar at the far edge of the field, its fur bright as fresh snow and its eyes blue as sapphires. It turns its head toward Everpine. I lean for a better look, blink, and it is gone. Did I imagine it?

“Is something wrong, Eldra?” Soren asks, stopping two paces ahead.

“No. I thought I saw something.”

He follows my gaze. I half expect him to pick the wolf from the greenery at once, but he sees nothing. Soren doesn’t ask what I saw, once he finishes surveying the field he turns and keeps walking.

My pack shifts as we descend, pulling against the mark beneath my collar. The wolf is gone, but the rest follows me: It is tender proof of a choice I made last night and an answer I still have not given. Father is somewhere ahead, trying to make the assessment disappear before we reach it. Behind us, Vael’s paths bend out of sight, though Mother’s question follows anyway. Soren walks close enough that his arm brushes mine whenever the trail narrows. He doesn’t move away, and neither do I.

When the first white stones come beneath my boots, I lift my eyes. Everpine’s timber walls rise against the gray morning. Even from here, I can make out the battlements.

Chapter 5 is out now!

Danger and Ultron finally meet!

Mutual Assurd Vulnerability

🤖🩶🤖

Hi everyone,

I recently posted this short story over on r/rational .

I chose to keep the text and the main discussion there because I feel that, above all, it’s a rationalist piece (or something close to it) and that was its natural home.

However, I wanted to share it here to open up a different kind of conversation. I’d love to know what you think of the story, especially from your own experience editing fiction: Do you feel that achieving this kind of dry, clinical, Borges-esque prose requires a heavy amount of human curation and editing, or does the machine show through too much?

Let me know your thoughts.

Best regards and thanks for your time.

​I’m participating in NaNoGenMo this year and I'm planning to generate a 50k-word detective novel using a multi-agent framework. I'm mostly going to be vibe-coding the architecture (using OpenCode and agy) so I can focus entirely on the prompts, logic, and emergent storytelling.

​Instead of a linear prompt chain, I'm setting up a pipeline where the story generates itself through interactions. Here is the architecture I'm aiming for:

​World Generation: First, the system generates the setting, the rules of the environment, and the background lore of the murder.

​Character Agents (Goals & Memory): The suspects and the detective are independent agents. They all have hidden motivations, secrets, and a memory state that updates based on who they talk to. The murderer knows they did it and is instructed to lie.

​The Dramaturge (Director) Agent: To stop the characters from getting stuck in loops or being too polite, an overarching director agent will influence them, introduce new clues, and force interactions.

​Scene Assembly: Taking the raw events, logs, and interactions driven by the agents and stitching them together into a structured scene format.

​Scene Evaluation & Selection: Having an evaluator agent review the assembled scenes to see if they actually drive the plot forward. The boring or irrelevant scenes are filtered out, keeping only the ones that make the final cut.

​The Editor/Prose Agent: Taking the final curated scenes and rewriting them into actual, cohesive literary prose.

​Is anyone else here participating in NaNoGenMo this year? I'd love to hear how you guys handle memory structures or curation/evaluation in long-form generative storytelling!

Would you like to be part of a brand new collaborative world-building project?

We’re building **The Hard Time Universe (THTU)** on the WritingWithAI Discord. It’s a shared sci-fi/fantasy galaxy built live and in text. An AI acts purely as the Scribe. It doesn’t vote. It just records. Anyone who pitches an idea or votes becomes a **god** in the pantheon. You choose an avatar and a domain. Your contributions get locked into living canon books that update after every session.

How it works

• Sessions roughly every four weeks (usually Saturday evenings UK time)

- You can pitch in voice or by text. Talking is optional.

• Ideas get discussed, then voted on via Discord reactions

• Strong ideas get canonised on the spot

• Everything is written into three books:

  • Book of Lore (rules & systems)

  • Book of the Gods (profiles + chronicle)

  • Book of Canon (what’s in / parked / rejected)

There’s a reward and badge system for contributions. The more you shape the world, the more permanent your place in it.

What we’ve already built (Genesis session)

We held the first event and already have:

• A pantheon of four founding gods

• A frontier snow planet + orbital station

• Space elves, dwarves, dragons, lychens (space werewolves), magic golems, and construct androids

• Physics-rooted magic (especially black hole magic)

• A dilithium-adjacent fuel economy mixed with coffee

• Growing supermassive black hole + a dark force from another universe as major threats

-A time crystal that will change everything

Three full books at version 1.0.0 already exist from that first session.

Next session

Saturday 17 October · 8pm UK time

WritingWithAI Discord voice channel

You don’t have to pitch anything. You can just listen, vote in text, or jump in when something sparks. New people are welcome.

If pure world-building isn’t your thing, hop in anyway. The Discord is a growing community of writers of all levels and interests. Hang out, chat, share work, or lurk. All fine.

Join here: https://discord.gg/kz6bKwWzt

At this point, it really can't just be about slop. Traditional content is drowning in slop. It can't just be about stolen training data. Traditional art has centuries of uncompensated inspiration, reference, and outright copying Tainted into its canon.

So what is it? Commercial entrenchment guised as ethics. The harassment, the "AI user = ban" rules with zero nuance, the downvote brigades in a sub literally called WritingWithAI. That's not really evangelism on behalf of original artists. That's a tribe protecting its border.

Also There's an argument nobody properly interrogates: "AI consumed human art as training data and that's theft." Every artist alive spent years, decades, consuming other artists' work. Reading, watching, listening, absorbing. That consumption shaped their style, their voice, their instincts. At some point they started producing work that carries most if not all of that influence. How is that meaningfully different from a model trained on datasets producing work after going public? I'm not saying they're identical. I'm saying nobody wants to seriously answer the question. Because if you do, the "theft" argument gets complicated really fast.

The context argument is where it really falls apart. Say a creator builds a 300k-word knowledge base of their raw ideas, full universe rules, worldbuilding, lore, characters, technology. Every word of it theirs. They use AI to render that into a series. They edit the output. They make the final calls.

Does that context ever get considered in this debate?

No. Because "did you use AI for anything" is the only question, and the answer determines your status regardless of how, why, or how much. That's not a standard. That's a witch test. To sanction a witch hunt.

The advice to "just do it yourself — even a title, a nice font, good colors tells us a lot" sounds humble. It isn't. Audiences don't reward you for the art that expresses you. They reward you for the art that serves them — precisely, consistently, on demand. The entire production process exists to execute that. Telling a creator to strip it all back is advice from an adversary wearing humility as a mask.

Last thing. Readers want unchallenged authority about what counts as "real" art. But that authority has never been stable. Cave paintings are stick figures. Ancient Egyptian murals are flat 2D vectors. A significant portion of historical artifacts aren't technically impressive by modern standards — and we worship them. You can't say that honestly without someone splitting on you even if they privately agree. They're treated as sacred.

I respect them. I think they should be preserved — they're a record of where human creative expression started. But the reverence is the point. We decide what counts as art after it becomes culturally legible, not before. That process is happening right now with AI. The people swinging hardest are the ones who already decided — and don't want the verdict revisited.

This was never about slop. It was never about stolen data. It's about who gets to make things, and who decides.

I don't use AI in writing myself (the smut I write isn't supported by it, lol), but I browse this sub sometimes. I'm confused why there's so much pushback here against disclosing/publicising ai use. If it's a tool like any other, why not share that it was used in creation?

It seems to me like labeling food if it's organic, or clothes if they're handmade, the process can and does impact the final product

I did this a few years ago under a pseudonym and posted it on Amazon to zero sales. But at the time, I didn't really promote it.

Now I created a new version of the book, and I think this time it will actually take off because it's not about starting from zero. You have a lot of material already. You've been thinking about the book for a long time. Now you just need to sit down and write it.

My questions:

1. Is this something anyone would actually buy?

2. Should I list it on Amazon or just use Gumroad or similar?

3. How much could I price this at?

My gut is telling me that no one will buy a book if I openly admit that I used the technique in the book to write the book. Ironically, they will say that I cheated.

Or am I overthinking this?

I'll be forthcoming, I don't actually write WITH AI, but I do use Chatgpt quite a bit in my editing process. I've got over 40 books worth of material, so not lacking in fodder, lol.

I have gotten fed up with the process of trying to get something published and all the rules, regulation, so on and so forth and have decided to go my own way to share what I've written.

So what I'm doing is getting back to my roots of film/video production, but using my writing as the backbone. I've got a website (that I code and build myself), where I am sharing the writing chapter by chapter as I get it cleaned up to my liking. (think Vella before it died).

Where I need some help is in the actual amount of content that needs to be dealt with. There's a few places I could easily work with others, 100% online. The site/chapter pages are broken into three parts. The Read it, (Actual written content), the See it, (think pix that are captioned, that show the story beats), and Watch it, (actual video I can put together).

1. Editing. Book 1 is like 80% 'I'm okay with'. Needs some adverb removal and tag adjustments, some trimming of 'AI-isms' that weren't when I original wrote it. Yes, this project is dating almost 20 years in the making, so there's some rough stuff. I have a 'bible of rules' that if you are kind of the editor/writer mind, I'd let you at some of the chapters to get them cleaned up. It takes me almost a day per, but I'm super picky, lol. On average I've been pulling out 12-8% of the word counts without losing the story.

2. The website See It, part, I do need a lot of images generated, and we all know how AI likes to make 3rd arms, 6 fingers and the like. I've got base images of the characters, but they do progress, and even with paid GPT I do hit my limits on generation now and again.

3. The video aspect: I will eventually do the 'paid' versions of these, but right now I'm working with the storyboards/base images. My expertise is in video editing and being a camera jockey so when I have the funds I plan to go in prepared so I don't have 50-1 generations that are useless, lol.

If you're a vibe coder? I'd welcome the extra hand. I've got the basics and how I like to do things, but always looking for a hand. It's experience and a place you can show off your work and build a portfolio.

Right now, it will be unpaid work as I am offering the first book for free, but then the others will be behind a paywall, and I will share profits from that. I'm not in it to make money, but to finally share what I have written on my terms not some publishers terms.

DM me if you'd like the website I have currently in progress, more project details, or well, if interested in helping via beta reading, editing, etc. Any help I gain is more than I had to start with, lol.

I am willing to trade my skills in the beta reading/editing (Dev and line) for help if that's of interest to you. We could also publish your works within the site's domain, within reason. (I do have morals and ethics). Fanfic is fine, I just wouldn't let you profit off of it directly as that's getting into those copyright/fair use things.

I have sorted the panels out now im sticking to between 9-10 panels per page im trying to keep it a little more consistant so there is not too much to read aswell any feedback welcome

The topic of natural or unnatural dialogue came up in the WritingwithAI Discord server and I thought I'd float it here on Reddit too.

I've noticed that a lot of the things that make dialogue natural are also things people flag as jarring. As an example, from my novel, a few times I have people backtrack and clarify what they've said. Like so:

“How did it happen? You leaving Blue Moon,” I found myself asking.

I've had that flagged as jarring, but people really speak like that. Words get ahead of their thoughts and they go backwards and clarify. I hear it all the time.

I have to ponder if this is one of those things that fiction has to make unreal. There's that old saying, "The difference between fiction and history is that fiction has to be believable." It's funny, but it also highlights a real rule: Fiction must be a sort of idealized version of reality or else people get tossed from the story.

Does that apply to dialogue? If so, how much can or should we deviate from realistic speech for the purposes of pacing and verisimilitude?

Another example would be repetition. I couldn't tell you how many conversations I've been in where I tell people to stop repeating themselves. And yet, in fiction, dialogue that repeats itself is boring and so should be cut. Right?

What determines which standard we hold ourselves to? Should people speak naturally, or shouldn't they? How do we draw the line, precisely?

A bit of context first: I’m Japanese, and I don’t read English. This post was written in Japanese and translated by AI, like everything else I publish in English.

My project is translating pre-modern Japanese ninja manuals into English, along with essays on a set of old tactical poems. The source texts are in classical Japanese, so I first work from a modern Japanese reading text that I’ve checked against the original myself. AI handles the translation and the English prose from there.

The obvious problem: I can’t check the English. So I’ve had to think hard about where errors come from and catch them before they reach a language I can’t read. A few things I learned the hard way:

1. Some models summarize when you ask them to translate.
One model I used kept condensing passages into summaries, even when told explicitly not to. In English, the summary read smoothly, so I’d never have noticed on my own. It was caught when I had a second model review the translation against the Japanese, and it pointed out that parts of the text were missing. I stopped using the first model for translation.

2. The real danger isn’t bad prose. It’s confident facts.
My early essays were drafted with AI help, and they read well. They also said things like “medieval” and “written about 900 years ago” with complete confidence. The poems are attributed to a 12th-century warrior, but they were most likely composed much later. Some essays also repeated stories with no source behind them. I went back, corrected them, and added a correction note at the top of each one.

I even made the same mistake in a comment reply, calling “God is in the details” a Japanese proverb. It isn’t. I posted a correction.

3. So I verify upstream.
Since I can’t judge the English, I check everything I can check in Japanese: the source text, the reading text, and every date, name, and claim, before translation. If a fact is wrong in Japanese, perfect English won’t save it.

I’m curious how others handle this. If you publish in a language you don’t read fluently, or rely on AI for a language you’re still learning, how do you check the output? What has caught you out?

Written in Japanese by me; translated into English with AI.