A bit more context for anyone that's new to this: Paolini is vocally against ai art. Unfortunately (by which I mean I am side eyeing the hell out of Tor right now) the publisher used a stock photo from what they called a reputable source (and did not credit the visual designer that tweaked it etc) (this is, to my understanding, a hell of a break in Tor's usual practice regarding cover artists)(open any other book published through Tor and there's usually multiple layers of credit given to all artists and designers involved) without realizing (the threads and news sources I was seeing about the cover when it was first released were written back in december of last year) (yes, I would think SOMEONE would notice that the stock photo was in fact ai generated)(ESPECIALLY since it is so clearly fucky)(however, we've also had 5-6 months of developing our eyes to spot ai art since then)(so)(you know)(it MIGHT have been an honest mistake)("might")(i reserve any judgement atm)(concern i do not reserve at all)(but judgement i'll reserve) that the stock photo was, in fact, ai generated.
Despite Paolini's uhhh distaste for ai art, and the lash back from fans and other concerned parties, the production schedule was already far enough ahead that to redo all the contracts, printing, etc. would have pushed back publication by at least a year. And, since it sounds like Tor wasn't exactly enthusiastic about making any changes, I would assume (and by assume i do mean assume)(someone correct me on this, i do not have many in's into publishing) the cost of making those changes would have been 1. high, and 2. pushed onto Paolini, who is, like every other author out there, not making anywhere near as much money as you might think.
Tor's lack of credits for the cover and use of ai art is concerning. I did just *skim* through some articles/threads, but I didn't see any reason for the lack of credit given. Cover artists are important. The number of folks in the notes jumping to conclusions about the ethics of the author + the quality of his work is proof enough of that, albeit maybe in a nontraditional way. I cannot stress this enough: even if there were no possible moral quandaries with using an ai stock photo, the people involved in turning the stock photo into a cover should have been credited. Additionally, one of the things Paolini pointed out is that eventually, we will have ai good enough to mimic passable fiction writing. Not good enough to be ~A New Modern Classic~ or whatever, but Good Enough. Good Enough to make pulps, or popcorn novels, or other forms of "Commercial Lit". Good enough to need only as much editing as An Actual Human Author.
And to me, if Tor is willing to forego giving credit + push using an ai generated cover now to save on costs, then I've gotta wonder:
what are they going to do when we get to "good enough"?