Is AI Being Ousted from the Heart of Sci-Fi? Comic-Con and Writers Tally the Fallen Stones

Doors are closing on artificial intelligence in the capital of imagination. Let's be honest, this conflict has been brewing for a while. San Diego Comic-Con and the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers Association (SFWA) have recently done their part and drawn a clear line: Here, human labor and the human mind speak.

The Step Back at the Nebula Awards and the 'Partially AI' Trap

When SFWA announced last December that works written with large language models (LLMs) would be ineligible for the Nebula Awards, everything seemed simple. However, looking at the details, things got complicated. The rule required authors who used an LLM 'at any point in the writing process' to disclose it. So, the door was left slightly ajar.

As Jason Sanford wrote in his Genre Grapevine newsletter, the backlash was immediate. The community believed this rule gave a green light to partially AI-generated works. And they were right. The SFWA Board apologized within days. 'Our approach and wording were wrong,' they said. Then? The rules were rewritten from scratch. Now, any work written 'wholly or partially' with an LLM tool cannot compete. Period.

Sanford is pleased that SFWA listened to its members. He himself refuses to use AI when writing fiction; because he believes these tools are not truly creative and destroy the essence of storytelling. But he asks the real question: How far will we extend the definition of 'LLM use'? With AI permeating everything, an author using an LLM-powered word processor or research tool should not be unfairly disqualified.

This is not just an award rule. It is an intellectual and ethical response from the community that understands it best, against a technology that big corporations are trying to force down everyone's throat. Precisely at a time when AI chatter is over and truly 'intelligent' systems are being sought, creators are rejecting 'counterfeit intelligence'.

The Silent Revolution at Comic-Con: No Room for AI in the Art Market

Meanwhile, Comic-Con, the biggest gathering of pop culture, experienced a similar reckoning. Artists noticed rules for the convention's art show stating that AI-generated works could be displayed (but not sold). The backlash was not delayed. The rules were quietly changed shortly after: 'Materials generated partially or wholly by artificial intelligence are not accepted into the art show.'

An explanation sent by email by show director Glen Wooten to some artists shows the gravity of the situation. He said the old rules had been in effect 'for several years' and worked as a deterrent because no one had applied with AI art. But the problem was growing. Wooten's words are clear: 'We need stronger language: NO! Simple and clear.'

These two events are just the beginning of the tension between technology and creativity. The music platform Bandcamp also banning gen-AI content shows the wave is growing. The problem is not just copyright infringement. The problem is the devaluation of the creative process, the invisibility of labor. This rebellion walks on the same ground as the debates about 'world models' and genuine understanding pursued by names like LeCun: the imitation of the machine or the comprehension of the human?

Frequently Asked Questions