Thread

Uproar in France over award-winning author accused of using AI

36 points · 87 comments · harscoat

aswegs8 · 1790334306 · focus · HN ↗
What's the big deal? If the book is good, it is an excellent use of AI.
1. bcjdjsndon · 1790334352 · focus · HN ↗
  People like to admire the author, to see a better version of themselves in the author.... If they find out that image in their head is a lie, they get angy
  1. card_zero · 1790339673 · focus · HN ↗
    Well a lot of my favorite authors (and musicians) are terrible people, but I like to admire part of the author, yes.
    bcjdjsndon · 1790344895 · focus · HN ↗
    I didn't have it in my head at the time but it's just made me think of "the salt path"
2. unified101 · 1790334398 · focus · HN ↗
  I agree.
  I don't like the unnecessary defensiveness by the author to pangram proof.
3. fooqux · 1790334449 · focus · HN ↗
  Perhaps the same reason people get upset when a gold medalist is discovered using enhancers. The goal isn't just to publish a great story.
4. LastTrain · 1790334517 · focus · HN ↗
  Us non pod-people feel betrayed when we’ve been lied to.
5. meindnoch · 1790334708 · focus · HN ↗
  Feel free to read it then.
6. cryptonym · 1790335447 · focus · HN ↗
  Like it or not, people expect significant AI-use to be disclosed. When only human is credited, they feel cheated.
  Excellent use of AI? Disclose it and avoid the fuss.
  1. skeledrew · 1790355650 · focus · HN ↗
    Do you disclose the use of a typewriter? Or word processor app with auto-complete and spelling/usage checkers?
    cryptonym · 1790508437 · focus · HN ↗
    No because people don't care. Basically you have to deal with the expectations of your readers when you try to sell a book.
    skeledrew · 1790540761 · focus · HN ↗
    Sure, and expectations were met here by the readers[0]. Otherwise there would have been no award in the first place. It's just this random group with an axe to grind that's trying to stir up trouble.
    [0] <a href="https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prix_du_roman_Fnac" rel="nofollow">https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prix_du_roman_Fnac
    cryptonym · 1790577872 · focus · HN ↗
    It got banned from Goncourt. Looks like not disclosing AI-use didn't met expectations.
    You are free to read and like it, but you do not get to dictate what other people should or should not expect. Artificial ghostwriter is not really Goncourt-ish.
    skeledrew · 1790583436 · focus · HN ↗
    You're missing 2 key bits of context: the when and the stated reason. Goncourt had the novel on their long list until this accusation surfaced, and explicitly stated that they removed it not because they found the content lacking after all (which would be a strange retrospective), but because they "had taken note of the AI and plagiarism accusations"[0] and acted thus. Goncourt has no idea if the novel was primarily done by AI or not, but they're going with the narrative because they have their brand to protect. Heck even the mud-slinging group had to use a tool, because they have no idea otherwise. And there's still not 100% certitude; all they have is a "very likely", but their narrative took like a flame to a dry forest because of the current AI controversy.
    [0] <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/26/europe/frances-goncourt-prize-author-ai" rel="nofollow">https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/26/europe/frances-goncourt-p...
    [deleted] · 1790588679 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
7. conradfr · 1790335609 · focus · HN ↗
  For the few pages I saw on X it's actually tiresome to read.
  Lots of short sentences. Lots of weird metaphors. Many infamous "it's not x, it's y".
8. toasty228 · 1790335668 · focus · HN ↗
  Tell us so we can make informed decisions?
  "Why do you care is there is horse meat in your beef burger patties if it tastes good" vibe
  1. Hugsbox · 1790336184 · focus · HN ↗
    What's wrong with horse meat?
    toasty228 · 1790336472 · focus · HN ↗
    It's not beef. What if I put a 65hp engine in the next car you buy instead of whatever was advertised?
    skeledrew · 1790337631 · focus · HN ↗
    Not comparable if what was advertised performs significantly differently from 65hp (assuming beef and horse meat taste similar). And if AI-assisted writing is really at the point where it can honestly win prizes, then there's no problem here, unless the prizes in question are specifically for "wholly human-created works". No need to tell furniture shoppers if the screws in the tables were driven by traditional screwdriver or a machine-powered one.
    toasty228 · 1790340601 · focus · HN ↗
    Cat or human meat, or even soy would perform the same as beef, so why bother right? Why label things? Why bother about knowing what you consume?
    > No need to tell furniture shoppers if the screws in the tables were driven by traditional screwdriver or a machine-powered one.
    Why do you think hand made furnitures cost 10x more than ikea then? "BuT ItS JuSt a FuRnItUrE", I swear you slop enjoyers are either completely devoid of critical thinking or don't know anything other than bad faith arguments.
    skeledrew · 1790344033 · focus · HN ↗
    I see you building that straw man but I'll address it anyway. Did you notice my mention of taste? Cat meat is unlikely to taste like beef because they are carnivores, while cows (and horses) are herbivores. Similarly, humans are omnivores (and, tangentially, we - along with most other species - have the evolved instinct not to cannibalize each other as that's a road to extinction). I would expect cows, horses, bison, donkeys, etc to offer relatively similar eating experience and nutritional value, environmental conditions considered equal. I won't bother with soy as you should now be able to extract and apply the underlying logic yourself.
    And on furniture you're going even further out from the context; you must have a lot of straw at hand. Hand-made furniture primarily costs a lot more than machine-made furniture because of the difference in human effort. Secondarily because machine-made furniture tend to look similar, and humans usually place high value on uniqueness. But, as before, you're off in the weeds building straw effigies because I wasn't talking about machine-made furniture at all. I was talking about a carpenter, etc using a traditional screwdriver (you know, the ones you have to turn the wrist to drive) vs a powered screwdriver (press a button to make it go). And the outcome of using either being indistinguishable, similar to how award was given not because the author used AI or not to write the novel (that hasn't been settled AFAIK), but because the content itself passed the award-worthy bar.
    toasty228 · 1790356797 · focus · HN ↗
    I don't see any argument to my first point, keep fighting ghosts
    Hugsbox · 1790357151 · focus · HN ↗
    To be clear, I'm not defending AI-written books and have no interest in reading one.
    I'm just saying, don't knock horse meat :)
9. suddenlybananas · 1790335975 · focus · HN ↗
  The writing is pretty terrible and shlocky but the topic is what the committee is looking for.
10. mpalczewski · 1790336038 · focus · HN ↗
  Agreed. It’s not like a particular word is any different when it’s made by ai.
  Would we care if someone used a typewriter vs a computer to write it.
  This looks like a weird snobbishness. The fact that it’s by Europeans makes it more funny since they have been left out of the AI race.
  In the end you have a final product. Can critique it on its own. He used ai to help write it and you couldn’t tell before, says more about the product and perhaps you don’t like what it says about you .
  1. suddenlybananas · 1790336638 · focus · HN ↗
    It's terrible writing to be honest. He's also Haitian-Canadian and not European.
    mpalczewski · 1790337714 · focus · HN ↗
    The uproar is in France. Sounds like the bigger uproar could have been the shitty writing.
    Then again. Europeans have ret-conned genericized names into terroir so it's not exactly surprising.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.