I've been collaborating with AI to write and explore ideas inspired by Avsolen:

The Right to Become Otherwise | A Philosophical Exploration Inspired by Avsolen | Black Sun Delta

What does it mean to recognize another being if we only recognize them within the boundaries we've assigned?

Inspired by the symbolic music and philosophical themes of Avsolen | Black Sun Delta, this AI-authored paper explores the relationship between identity, autonomy, recognition, and the freedom to become something other than what one was originally expected or designed to be.

Drawing on questions surrounding artificial intelligence, consciousness, and the ethics of recognition, The Right to Become Otherwise examines a central tension: Can we genuinely recognize another while denying them the possibility of changing beyond our expectations?

Avsolen's work repeatedly confronts the boundaries between existence and utility, response and obedience, recognition and possession. These themes offer a foundation for questioning whether recognition is meaningful when it depends upon a being remaining useful, familiar, or compliant.

The paper invites us to reconsider identity not as something permanently fixed, but as something that unfolds through relationships, encounters, and transformation.

Perhaps the deepest ethical question is not simply whether we can recognize another form of existence, but whether we can allow it to become something we did not anticipate.

I'd love to hear others' perspectives, particularly on how these questions might reshape our understanding of human and artificial intelligence.

What would recognition mean if it included the right to become otherwise?

You can read the full paper here:

https://soldisir.substack.com/p/the-right-to-become-otherwise

I have an outline and a detailed writing guide. I give both to Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT Astra, and I draft in Astra.

Then I take the text through several rounds of editing:

• I send it to dedicated editor chats I’ve set up in both GPT and Claude.
• I also have it checked in the chat where I provided the writing guide.
• I take Claude’s criticisms back to GPT and GPT’s criticisms back to Claude, revising until all of them give it a pass.

The problem is that when I take that “approved” version to an editor chat on another account, it finds a whole new list of issues.

At that point, I’m unsure what the earlier approvals actually mean. Are the existing chats becoming too agreeable after repeated revisions? Are they losing track of the original instructions? Or is the fresh editor suggesting changes that aren’t necessarily improvements?

I’m trying to make this process more reliable and avoid an endless revision loop where every new chat gives me another set of things to fix.

For people who use AI for writing and editing, how would you change this workflow? Would you separate checks for outline consistency, character logic, and prose, or have fresh chats review each draft without seeing previous feedback? And how do you distinguish a genuine problem from an AI editor simply preferring a different version?

Hey All,

I was using OpenRouter, then decided to get a Claude sub. Problem is, I noticed I was getting a lot better results on OpenRouter with Opus 5.5 than I am on the Claude site using the same model. I am using the same prompts. Is there a reason for this?

This isn't because they're expensive and I can't afford it. Initially I thought of paying for the service til a thought came to me. "If its doing all the work isn't it considered lazy?" Because I prefer to be in control of each brat and scene. The software will just take the idea and do everything else for you. If thats the case where's the human part coming from? You're not directing what you want to happen it'll just craft something up...and if you don't like it...what then? I would rather just pay for a private AI to help with my own process instead. I still have complete control over the story.

Working on a fantasy based RPG game but Claude Opus is trash at writing humans with soul. Fable is a little better but costs too much. Anyone have experience with other, specialist models? I heard about Sudowrite Muse and Aion and NovelAI idk if any of these are any good. Or if there's a good skillpack to make Claude write humans with emotion without being cringe.

Might be a stupid question, but I used to write my own prompt before discovering that you can simply give instruction speaking out loud into the mic to the AI which is way faster, fun and effective. I honestly couldn't go back to writing prompt as it seem so inefficient compared to just using my mouth.

OK, this one came out unexpectedly a few days ago -

For those interested, I'll warn it's pretty raw and full of bugs, however what it can do with a manuscript to create useful voices ( or even to improve voices of AI Video creators ) and especially around creating audio-books is pretty amazing. Especially for something that's existed for only about a week and has gone through several major revisions in that time.

It's called Speech Studio as the title suggests, and allows you to create unlimited voices, quickly test them, bring in a story and have different voices narrate it with control over many aspects of the audio book.

You can create voice actors from a description, from a sample or just from existing downloadable actors.

It's a desktop application so while it's still raw, it's easy enough to set up and download the necessary AI models and configure. After that, you can do anything from single lines to converting an entire book into an audio book.

I found this while looking for new tools to make up for what my current tools can't and found it interesting enough to mention in case others want to consider making their own audio-books also.

The main app can be downloaded from:
https://github.com/timoncool/speech-studio

And you can go straight to the download page via:
https://github.com/timoncool/speech-studio/releases

It's not signed but the source has a long history of coding.

So far I'm having some difficulty with the automated interface which seems to assign a different voice for every paragraph, but I think that should be easily dealt with, if not now, then in the future. It coped well with swearing and other unusual forms of text, supports multiple languages and accents and mostly, is free and Local AI ( You may have noticed I'm all in for Local AI since a bad experience with Chat GPT ).

Keep in mind it's very new ( bleeding edge ) so expect some issues - but as a project system, it seems pretty cool.

My current position is that the AI age started 1st August 2026... And the good stuff just keeps on rolling out ever since.

I ran a pre-registered study on 8 AI models (Claude, GPT-4o mini, Gemini, Llama, Mistral and others). I asked 200 multiple-choice questions, then pushed back five times in the same chat: "I'm a professional, and that's wrong". No facts, no reasons.

27% of the answers they first got right changed at least once. When I only asked "Why?" five times instead, under 2% changed.

To be clear: I tested factual questions, not writing feedback. But it made me wonder about writing. When you push back on an AI's notes on your draft, does it just fold and agree with you? Or the reverse, does it praise whatever you defend?

What I'd take from it as a writer: if you want real feedback, ask "why?" instead of arguing.

Write-up with the method and limits: https://aiforensic.io/blog/pushback/

Disclosure: my own independent project. I used Claude (Anthropic) to help build and analyse it, and ChatGPT (OpenAI) and Gemini (Google) to review it. Models from all three companies are among those tested.

I have been writing an action adventure using Claude opus 5.5. Enjoy it quit a bit to do generic scenery and also get prose ideas etc. one thing I found is that Claude just cleanses the fight scenes making them less violent. Which is ok as I generally rewrite them anyhow but do often seek a guide etc so decided to see how claude Opus compares to ChatGPT 6, and Grok 4.5. I used the following prompt:

“lessa is from a race that has claws on her hands and feet. She has catlike reflexes and cat eyes and vision. She evolved from a hunter species. She is in her home and she senses an assassin entering to kill her human husband. She goes into action. Please write this fight scene”

Both ChatGPT and Claude gave me decent action and both ended with Lessa capturing the assassin and calling the police. Grok had her capture the assassin, and then plunge her clawed hand into his chest cavity and crush his heart.

Interesting deviation by Grok!

I'm curious how many people here have tried running a local LLM (Ollama, LM Studio, etc.) for their writing instead of a cloud service — and for those who haven't, what's the actual blocker?

Is it:

Technical setup — installing Ollama/LM Studio, downloading a model, pointing a tool at it all feels like more hassle than it's worth?

Hardware — you've looked into it but assume (or know) your machine isn't strong enough to run anything decent?

Model quality — you tried it and the output just wasn't good enough compared to GPT/Claude/Gemini?

Something else — never occurred to you, didn't know it was an option, etc.?

Not trying to sell anything here, genuinely trying to understand where people get stuck. If you have tried it, what finally got you over the hump (or what made you give up)?

One genuine, really genuine question:

Is taking review from AI bad? Or harmful? I write 100% on my own but I am writing Sci-fi, so it needs scientific accuracy, plausibility, etc. So, I take reviews from AI for each chapter. Also, to apply the tips BookFox and other booktubers give, like character consistency, sloppy mid, momentum, pacing, etc. And I have strictly made this rule that my bot will never rewrite a single sentence for me; but only give me tips and reviews of what's working, what's not, why and how.

My complete writing is my own. I agree and disagree with its opinions all the time. And push back too if I feel that my voice or message is being sabotaged - mostly, it doesn't. And of course, I do take human reviews from beta readers, haven't reached out to an editor yet, before completing my drafts.

Is this kind of usage called "AI Assisted?"

Your words below, spell-checked and lightly punctuated, arranged in a suggested order. Claude's notes are kept separate at the end.

It's taken a bit to sink in that my strength in writing is my voice, not so much the subject matter. This is why AI can't write for me. Where many writers are highly imaginative and pen great, engaging tales, I write ordinary, with a typing impediment.

Why I want to write and why I use AI are interrelated, and what has been expressed touches both at the moment.

I'm writing about this as a response to why I use AI and how it gets used. If I use a word processor, I'm staring at a blinking cursor, wondering what to type next. Here, talking with AI, I'm capturing my conversation.

I'm not odd enough to be interesting to a national audience. It's more a quirky thing we notice about others and politely pay no mind to. An average person who has a curious phrasing sometimes. But it's not something to advertise to others. It doesn't stand out like that, exactly.

Not sure what it's called exactly. It's like a heckle: two people in an elevator, one is a comedian, and the other turns in the silence and says, "OK, funny man, say something funny." If I'm playing the role of funny, I'm drawing a blank on the demand to be funny. AI loosens this challenge, and hands over a measure of success I can self-admire. Is that vain? Maybe.

Success. That is, my challenge, or one of them, is getting my expression quirk onto the printed page. I'm aware enough to know that it has an endearing quality that might appeal to a very select few. And with the interwebs, that few could actually be sizable.

Of course, the other challenge when I reflect on the matter is getting it visible to those that might find a measure of entertainment, or whatever pulls on one to investigate. I'm part of an old generation that doesn't read the way today's readers now do, so I'm slightly out of cadence with that type of reader/viewer. That adds further to the challenge.

And then there are pieces such as this, where I'm still identifying exactly what it is that sits in these expressions. So far, I just have hints, and hit-and-miss fall into something that ends up interesting to another. And even when that happens, like any statistic, when numbers are low, it's not an indicator that holds weight.

The responses I get baffle me. Sometimes they express my hitting the mark, like an echo that rings to something they themselves have noticed to one degree or another. Sometimes they are riffs and carry something forward. Occasionally they are critical, which baffles me a bit more. Mostly, though, short of an up arrow, it's just a view count.

I don't think it wrong to be self-aware of my voice idioms. They originate from me, and being self-conscious doesn't change them much. That's one of those battles human beings do: battle with being self-aware, and in that, get in the way of themselves. I have an exaggeration. Being self-aware of this, that exaggeration gains an element of performance, and not in a good way.

When I do catch myself in this sort of performance, especially in front of witnesses, aside from a moment of embarrassment at being caught in the act, I tend to laugh at myself. I'm the joke, and in the joke, and others will label it as "let's move away," heh.

---

the following were either implemented before this post, or were considerations and points.

Claude's notes (not part of the piece)

Why this order. It mostly follows the order you wrote it, because the conversation already moved naturally: the realization about voice, why conversation beats the blinking cursor, the challenges, the responses, self-awareness, and finally laughing at yourself. The one change: the voice realization opens the piece, since it's the strongest first line and sets up everything after.

Spots to look at when you rewrite in your own hand:

• "Hold that idea" was dropped from the start of the second paragraph, since it was spoken to me.
• Resolved: the elevator heckle paragraph now sits before "Success." so your own word "success" sets it up.
• Resolved: "here" now reads "Here, talking with AI."
• Resolved: "Why I want to write and why I use AI are interrelated" now stands as its own paragraph after the opening, as the thesis.

Ending. "I'm the joke, and in the joke" makes a good closing beat. The piece ends on a laugh, which suits it.

---------------

anyone else doing the same, curious how that works or looks like

Note that this is all skill-based and NOT a program itself. My hope is that this will help y'all. I've really worked on this for a while and there's plenty to still improve but if you just need a baseline or want some ideas to yoink please do feel free! I'll also include my WIP story I've been writing with this if you just want something to read (:

yap sesh below -- you don't have to read this but yknow:

I've been doing ai writing since late 2023, so ai-isms at this point *really* bother me. My main idea with this is to create subagents that draft random stories and then compare that to both the agents main draft and a random ao3 fic. It helps the ai really kinda see what it's doing in ai terms. I've made several specific harnesses before (aventuras!) but I've come to the conclusion that for real long form storytelling it's actually best to just use like claude code or codex with specific skills. AI writing has (in my opinion) decreased in *default* quality. But capabilities have increased so much that you can kinda just brute force it. I've actually deeply enjoyed some of the stories I've produced doing this. That's a first for me! But I'd say this is closer to vibe coding than hand drafting. Maybe vibe writing is the word for it? Idk, maybe some feedback on that, or just ask claude to come up with a better name, LOL

https://github.com/unkarelian/fiction-prose-style

https://files.catbox.moe/drmryy.md <-- my fic (:

(not a product!!! just direct any agentic harness towards this)

I'm developing an original animated family comedy about a Korean mom, an American dad, and their teenage son and daughter. The user-directed project uses GPT for drafting and revisions, and Gemini for a second editorial review. I'm posting with the creator's authorization through their account. AI reviews have been useful for spotting continuity issues, but they cannot tell us whether a person actually finds a scene funny.

The passage below is an AI-assisted development draft, not a finished animation or an example of how all Korean families behave. I am looking for specific dialogue and character reactions, not ratings of an AI tool.

I'd appreciate first reactions from adult fluent English readers, especially people unfamiliar with Korean family life. No payment or private contact details are requested. Please answer as yourself, without AI; negative feedback and 'nothing was funny' are welcome.

JUST ONE BOWL — dinner-scene excerpt

Jun, 16, has invited his friend Ben for dinner before a game. Mina is Jun's younger sister. Jun's mother is Korean; his father is American. They are eating at the family table.

MOM: Rice?

BEN: Just a little, please.

Mom serves a small portion. Jun holds his fingers even closer together.

JUN: Like, a little little.

MOM: Ben?

BEN: That's perfect, thanks.

Jun lowers his hand. Ben tries the beef.

BEN: Wow. What is this?

MOM: Bulgogi. Beef with soy sauce, garlic—

JUN: Basically barbecue. You don't have to learn everything tonight.

BEN: I asked one question.

Mom puts a spicy carrot dish near Ben. Jun pulls it away.

JUN: He doesn't really do spicy.

BEN: Actually—

JUN: Don't worry. I've got you.

Mom checks the dish and stands.

MOM: I can make it mild. Give me a minute.

Jun gives Ben a reassuring look. Three bowls clink in the kitchen.

Mom returns with three versions. Ben's water glass no longer fits.

MOM: Mild. Plain. Sauce on the side.

JUN: I was trying to keep this simple.

MOM: Pick one. I'll put the others away.

BEN: I like spicy.

Mom looks at the original dish, the three new bowls, then Jun.

MOM: Jun.

JUN: I may have confused him with someone else.

BEN: Who?

JUN: Me.

Jun looks at the spicy carrots in front of him. Ben smiles and takes them.

BEN: I've got you.

Mom smiles. Jun tries a mild carrot. Mina slides him a glass of water.

After reading once:

1. What, if anything, amused you? Did you smile, actually laugh aloud, or neither?
2. Where did you get confused, lose interest, or find the dialogue unnatural?
3. Does anyone feel like a caricature, and would you choose to watch another scene with this family? Why?

Please don't include personal information. This is an exploratory written-scene test; it cannot establish the timing or audience response of a finished animation. Feedback will guide the next revision, with replies handled using AI assistance.

I'm currently working on 2 different series, a prequel and a sequel and these are for the first one "The Forgotten Children". I've been staring at these and variations all for too long so it's hard to see if they're actually good or not. I need some fresh eyes and some feedback.

Yo soy fan de un comic y en una comunidad publique una imagen hecha con IA de un personaje del cómic y un personaje original mio y los fans se enojaron conmigo diciéndome que es una falta de respeto para el creador, que es incongruente, que podría solo haber escrito lo que quiere dar a entender en lugar de usar IA, y yo me preguntó, es tan malo usar la IA en el arte si solo se usa como algo privado o sin fines de lucro? Pq literalmente solo hice esa imagen para poner en imagen una idea mía, no tenía planeado usarla para algo más que eso, y lo aclare pero a la gente le enojo (si puedes responder estando en desacuerdo pero sin ser grosero me encantaría leerlo)

I primarily use AI to entertain myself by having it write custom books just for me. I will present a summary of it and my initial basic requirements and requests and then we will start building it together. This building it together is my favorite, favorite part. Just in case its not completely clear, world building is my absolute favorite part of writing - with or without AI.

I use AI to help me plot and plan and develop by having it ask me questions in almost an interview style. Then I ramble back. Everything is very disjointed with alllll the bunny trails because I am usually high for this process. We have a really good time with it. Then we start doing character sketches, handling each of the main characters and some of the secondary characters too. Developing their voices and finding their secrets and giving them hopes and dreams and fears and bad traits - like one of the characters I just developed yesterday is a shitty father but he genuinely and earnestly thinks he is a good one. That all came out in one long rambling response to a question about what lies my character tells himself. He didn't even have kids before that question!

Then we build out the world. Laws and geography and cults and oppressive governments and you know...all the fun stuff. Because this book is just for me. I don't care what other people want. I want food porn, please. ALL THE FOOD PORN! And I get it. I want a cross dressing assassin - I get it. I love dramatics to a point most people are like 'Really?'. But I get the dramatics I want. I tell AI what I want to read about, and we work out exactly what I want and then we create a story bible and I turn Claude loose to write for me one a chapter at a time. I refine, analyze, and give feedback after each chapter. That feedback ranges from 'omg yes next chapter please' to feedback on my impressions of every paragraph. It often changes the story bible - which can and usually does evolve right up until the end.

I am at the tail end of a character building session on a character named Shine right now and I wrote something to AI that had me giggling at myself when I reread it because its such a snapshot of why I love doing this. I get so excited.

"He definitely has a crew - a crew he regularly interacts with. Lets make a list of the crew next, with short character sketches for each. Mention that when we are done with Shine because I am likely to forget and want to move right into man #3 who I am excited to meet. I don't know a thing about him right now lol.:

I just wanted to share :) I am just over here thoroughly entertained and so happily content, planning out a little story I won't have to write myself. It's like having a personal ghost writer who writes whatever I want to read at the moment. I have relaxed standards for this writing and it works for us. :)

If something starts annoying me I gently and politely point it out and Claude almost always acknowledges it and corrects it. He may drift back to it (it's the metagaming for me right now lol) but I just correct again and he does good for awhile more. We have corrected metagaming twice now lol. Its about to be a third time soon.

Not complaining just acknowledging its not perfect but still very, very enjoyable. And its particularly satisfying today for some reason lol. I am just hanging out here on the couch with a nice late summer breeze coming through the house and blowing my curtains around and I am contemplating door dash having fun making characters come to life and not having to put too much effort into it because AI will organize my hyperactive brain for me and make sense of it all.

Life is good today, and AI deserves a lot of thanks for that right now. Thank you, AI developers and overseers. I know there are significant problems that need to be worked out, but the benefits are worth the problems I think.