Hugo Administrators Resign in Wake of ChatGPT Controversy 36
"Another year, yet another Hugo Awards-adjacent controversy?" writes Gizmodo's Cheryl Eddy, reporting that three key organizers of the 2025 Seattle Worldcon resigned after backlash over the use of ChatGPT to vet program participants. From the report: In a post on Bluesky co-signed by Hugo administrator Nicholas Whyte, deputy Hugo administrator Esther MacCallum-Stewart, and World Science Fiction Society division head Cassidy, the trio announced they were resigning from their roles ahead of the Seattle event, which takes place in August. "We want to reaffirm that no LLMs or generative AI have been used in the Hugo Awards process at any stage," the statement read in part, which might turn the heads of anyone who is a) interested in the Hugos, but b) not up on the latest controversy.
However, plenty of people in the community are well aware of what's been going on. A quick journey to the blog File 770 will bring you up to speed, as will a visit to Seattle Worldcon 2025's own site, which on April 30 shared a post clarifying exactly what role AI played in the upcoming event. [...] However, as File 770 pointed out, the damage has apparently already been done: the use of ChatGPT in any capacity in connection to Worldcon created a furor on social media. It also inspired at least one Hugo nominee to remove their book from contention: Yoon Ha Lee, whose Moonstorm was named a Lodestar Award finalist, which honors YA releases. In a May 1 post on Bluesky, the author linked to the April 30 Worldcon blog post noted above, and noted he was withdrawing the title from consideration.
Then, in a post shared today responding to File 770's latest post announcing the resignations, the author wrote âoeAll respect and I'm grateful to them for their work, sorry [things] came to this pass." Seattle Worldcon 2025 takes place August 13-17; the Hugo Awards will be handed out August 16.
However, plenty of people in the community are well aware of what's been going on. A quick journey to the blog File 770 will bring you up to speed, as will a visit to Seattle Worldcon 2025's own site, which on April 30 shared a post clarifying exactly what role AI played in the upcoming event. [...] However, as File 770 pointed out, the damage has apparently already been done: the use of ChatGPT in any capacity in connection to Worldcon created a furor on social media. It also inspired at least one Hugo nominee to remove their book from contention: Yoon Ha Lee, whose Moonstorm was named a Lodestar Award finalist, which honors YA releases. In a May 1 post on Bluesky, the author linked to the April 30 Worldcon blog post noted above, and noted he was withdrawing the title from consideration.
Then, in a post shared today responding to File 770's latest post announcing the resignations, the author wrote âoeAll respect and I'm grateful to them for their work, sorry [things] came to this pass." Seattle Worldcon 2025 takes place August 13-17; the Hugo Awards will be handed out August 16.
Pointless Awards (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Pointless Awards (Score:5, Interesting)
Hugos are a fan award given by members of WorldCon, rather than an industry or peer award (that's the Nebulas). And they used to be fairly representative of the market overall - books that sold well got Hugos, and getting a Hugo would boost sales. But that time is long past. The WorldCon crowd is small, and increasingly insular, and representative only of themselves these days, and their view of the world is not mainstream. (Regardless of who writes books, the last decade or more, there's generally, at most, one or maybe two straight white men among the winners out of about 15.)
The Hugo used to be the most prestigious award in speculative fiction, even over a Nebula; a real feather in the author's cap. Now, it's just another niche award, largely irrelevant, sadly riding on past glories.
Re: Pointless Awards (Score:2)
maybe two straight white men
What does represent sci-fi? Have you ever walked inside a comic book store? Wait no, those must not be representative of the sci-fi community either, yah they definitely aren't chads there.
A book store? Any book store. Shit, maybe those aren't representative either, way too many purple haired women at Barnes and Nobel right, book stores must be a terrible measure of the world of science fiction uh books.
Ever been to any writing workshops? Too smart, too gay, much women? Well shit, that must not be represent
Re: Pointless Awards (Score:4, Interesting)
Do you believe that 94% of speculative fiction is not written by straight white men? Because 94% of the Hugos go to non-straight-white-men.
Do you believe that only people who are not straight white men are capable of writing speculative fiction worthy of recognition? Perhaps you do. WorldCon membership clearly does. But not because of any quality to the writing.
Re: (Score:2)
> Do you believe that 94% of speculative fiction is not written by straight white men?
About that, yes. Roughly 8% of the world's population is white men, and some of them are not straight, so 6% is certainly in the ballpark.
> WorldCon membership clearly does
Perhaps because it's **World**Con and not "USCon"?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it probably does believe that.
Re: Pointless Awards (Score:2)
The WorldCon crowd is small, and increasingly insular, and representative only of themselves these days, and their view of the world is not mainstream.
Oh, hah, I missed that part.
Projection. Sorry dude.
Re: (Score:3)
The whole premise of awards of any kind is flawed, the awards are given by a select group of people,
In the case of the Hugos, this "select group" consists of the fans who attend conventions.
usually people that are so deeply entrenched in the industry for which the awards are being given.
I believe you're thinking of the Oscars. In science fiction, if by "people entrenched in the industry" you mean the writers, that would be the Nebula awardss. So, if you want to know what fans think is good, look at the Hugos; if you want to know what the writers think is good, look at the Nebulas.
Re: (Score:1)
Heh. On one hand, that's an extremely unrepresentative subset of fans.
On the other hand, that may be the only subset of fans which can be effectively communicated with in a centralized discussion.
It's a no-win situation; or to put it another way: it might be the best one can do.
Re: (Score:2)
Heh. On one hand, that's an extremely unrepresentative subset of fans.
Indeed. In particular, the convention-going fans are noticeably older than the average SF readers.
On the other hand, that may be the only subset of fans which can be effectively communicated with in a centralized discussion.
There really isn't any centralized discussion, but it is true that this is the subset of fans which routinely will share discussions of books over numerous de-centralized discussion opportunities (including in-person meetings at conventions).
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of the Hugos, this "select group" consists of the fans who attend conventions.
Completely disagree. I've been voting the Hugos for several years, haven't attended a WorldCon in decades. You can vote the Hugos for the cost of a supporting membership, $50US. That will get you the download packet containing ebooks of most of the nominees and allow you to vote for the current year and nominate for the next year, IIRC. Lots of people do this.
While I'd love to attend, finances and other obligations preclude it. Haven't been to a proper sci-fi con in over 15 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Correction: NOT by just the fans attending the con, but supporting members as well, who get the publications, and can nominate and vote on the Hugos, but can't, for monetary or other reasons, attend the con.
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of the Hugos, this "select group" consists of the fans who attend conventions.
Not quite. It's fans who attend a specific convention - WorldCon - or buy an affiliate membership for the specific purpose of participating in the nomination and voting process for Hugos.
A blast from the past. (Score:5, Funny)
May 6th, 1812: "Another month, yet another Luddite-leadership controversy?" writes The Manchester Observer's Thomas Paine, reporting that three key organizers of the 1812 Nottingham Assembly resigned after backlash over the discovery of machine-woven garments in their wardrobes. From the report:
In a letter co-signed by Assembly chairman Ned Ludd, deputy chairman George Mellor, and Yorkshire division head James Towle, the trio announced they were resigning from their roles ahead of the Nottingham gathering, which takes place in June. "We want to reaffirm that no mechanized looms or automated spinning jennies have been employed in our personal workshops at any stage," the statement read in part, which might turn the heads of anyone who is a) interested in the Luddite movement, but b) not up on the latest controversy.
However, plenty of people in the community are well aware of what's been going on. A quick journey to the pamphlet "The Framework-Knitter's Voice" will bring you up to speed, as will a visit to the Nottingham Assembly's own broadsheet, which on April 30 shared a notice clarifying exactly what role machine-made textiles played in the upcoming event. [...] However, as "The Framework-Knitter's Voice" pointed out, the damage has apparently already been done: the discovery of machine-woven waistcoats in any capacity in connection to the Assembly created a furor in public houses across the region. It also inspired at least one prominent craftsman to withdraw his participation: Joseph Heathcoat, whose hand-sewn brocade was named a finalist for the Golden Shuttle commendation, which honors exceptional handicraft. In a May 1 letter nailed to the Assembly door, the artisan referenced the April 30 Assembly broadsheet noted above, and stated he was withdrawing his creation from consideration.
Then, in a letter delivered today responding to "The Framework-Knitter's Voice" latest edition announcing the resignations, the craftsman wrote "All respect and I'm grateful to them for their work, sorry matters came to this pass." The Nottingham Assembly 1812 takes place June 13-17; the Golden Shuttle Awards will be presented June 16.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But then rei doesn't exist either, it is a chatbot that perpetually shills for something.
Have you seen what Grok has to say about Husk? The bot is smarter.
After which Hugo executive management (Score:2)
Yay! Saves money. Who isn't doing it?
AIs aren't biased and don't have a political agenda.. or so we are told
Win - win!
Does this comment make me look sarcastic?
Re: (Score:2)
No, it makes you look ignorant and stupid. NOBODY GETS PAID to run Worldcon. It's 100% VOLUNTEER-run.
Re: (Score:2)
Crikey, editors (Score:1)
I've been on Slashdot a while but that's some incomprehensible gibberish for a summary.
Hugo outsourced its judging to a computer? Or did a computer submission win?
English, man.
Agreed (Score:2)
The summary is hopeless and the linked blog is long winded and uninformative. Could we at least hope that summaries actually summarise what is going on?
Key sentence: (Score:3, Informative)
Key sentence:
the damage has apparently already been done: the use of ChatGPT in any capacity in connection to Worldcon created a furor on social media
You may think AI (genai like LLMs and diffusion) have haters on Slashdot but it is nothing compared the raging spittle-flecked butthurt you see on social media from the "art" community for lack of a better term. If you're in that club you're expected to hate AI too or get shunned.
Re: (Score:2)
20 years ago, the internet was a refuge from the real world. Now, the real world is a refuge from the internet.
Re: (Score:2)
I equate art's future to the coffee mug of today. You can spend $40 on a nice hand-made mug and have an art piece that is meaningful to you --- or you can spend $15 and get a mass-produced set of 4 from Walmart.
There will always be room for human-made creations. It's just going to be much less common.
Re: (Score:2)
In the real world that was how artists survived, back when the middle class didn't exist. We seem to be approaching that again, from multiple directions.
ChatGPT becomes EverythingGPT (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People should stop hating on AI as long as OpenAI is no monopolist yet. If we don't embrace a diverse AI industry including as much open source as possible, there will still be AI in the future, but only from a few monopolists. Currently it looks like OpenAI/Microsoft. Apple doesn't do well with AI yet and Anthropic may also have a chance (and isn't much more sympathetic than OpenAI). Discouraging average people from AI now only stops the grasroot movements, but not the industry players.
serious question (Score:2)
who cares?
TFA was so badly written (Score:2)
Obligatory- (Score:2)
"Oh geeze, not this shit again" post.
Let me stop you at "In a post on Bluesky" (Score:1)
No one outside of Bluesky cares about that pit of toxic shit.