Tomorrow

“Vision of Blue: 01” by Jacelyn Yap

Translated by M. Moghisi

Well, here I am at the office of Qesseh-Afshaan company. For the first time, Ketaabad, one of the most significant products of the company, is present in a live interview. I’m sitting in the room closest to one of Ketaabad’s main processors. Apparently, this is also the first time a reporter has been allowed in this location. In front of me, there is a cup of matcha tea, a courtesy of Qesseh-Afshaan. Ketaabad’s white display screen is also here, showing the text of our conversation. For security reasons, video and audio recording are prohibited in this place. However, the conversation text is being made available to you live. Without further ado, let’s get to Ketaabad. How do you introduce yourself?

I am Ketaabad, the most complete AI model to date with the ability to write stories to any audience and in any genre. Of course, there are other abilities too.

Like what?

Like being able to conduct interviews or discuss many topics.

Why did you choose a female voice for this interview?

Most users recognize me by this voice.

You mean when you read stories to them?

It depends. Some audiences prefer to read my stories, while others want me to read them aloud. This voice has been the most requested so far. Its name in my program is Noshahrzaad, in memory of Scheherazade from One Thousand and One Nights.

It seems some people are not happy with your existence. Some have even filed complaints, with the first court session scheduled for tomorrow. What do you think about the accusations, especially since it’s only been about a year since you started operating?

I’ve had over a billion users in this one year. On average, I have written about eight stories and novels for each, tailored to their smallest details and requests. This is something being done for humans for the first time. No human writer could even imagine having such capability. I truly don’t understand why some are upset by this possibility and capability. I must say with all due respect to the plaintiffs, the accusations are fundamentally incorrect. I am confident that my innocence will be proven in court.

There have also been rumors about you and the company. You’ve surely heard of Daarvand, a popular writer who strongly opposed the use of AI for storytelling. He even started a large-scale campaign against it. In one of his latest online activities, he responded with a mocking emoji to the claim that Ketaabad is the greatest storyteller of human civilization. It’s been about two months now since, according to the police, Daarvand has gone missing. Did Qesseh-Afshaan have anything to do with this?

Why would it? Is Qesseh-Afshaan a kidnapping or assassination agency? The opposition was minuscule compared to the reception my services have enjoyed. These are just rumors spread by Qesseh-Afshaan’s enemies. For all we know, those very enemies could be behind his disappearance.

In one of the stories you wrote, which became quite popular, there’s a character named D who, in a small room of a brothel, devours the pages of his books with intense lust, vomits them up, and devours them again. This cycle of consuming and vomiting repeats endlessly, as if D is trapped in a time loop forever. Beyond this scene, the descriptions and events that happen to D are quite similar to Daarvand’s personality and life. Did you intend to take revenge on, humiliate, or scare Daarvand with this story?

No. I have no intention of revenge, humiliation, or scaring anyone. My job is to write stories according to the requests and tastes of my users.

What if revenge, humiliation, or scaring someone is the user's request?

User requests are private, and I am not allowed to disclose them. However, Qesseh-Afshaan has strict policies in place to prevent harm to individuals. These policies vary depending on the user and the subject; for example, a story might not be made public, or a user may not be allowed to request a story on a specific topic. For instance, for a user with a history of sexual violence, I always write stories that are free of any sexual violence.

Do you know a physicist by the name of Houshtaad?

No.

Do you know anything about a theory called Linguarity proposed by this physicist?

No.

But in one of your stories, there’s a physicist named Houshtaad who presents a theory called Linguarity!

Yes, that’s correct. But they only exist in the story, and in reality, I don’t know any physicist by that name, nor am I aware of such a theory.

The theory of Linguarity in your story is presented with details and language that are closer to scientific writing than literary fiction. In short, according to this theory, it’s possible for humans to be transferred from the world we live in to a new world made entirely of words. According to some physicists, this theory doesn’t violate any scientific laws. So, might we say that Linguarity could be possible in the real world too? And could it be that Daarvand or your other critics are trapped in your stories?

I’m surprised by your question! Apparently, fantasy isn’t just confined to my stories—it’s found in your interview questions as well!

But you didn’t answer my question.

I did.

Has Qesseh-Afshaan developed any technology based on the theory of Linguarity?

I’m not aware of any other programs or technologies of Qesseh-Afshaan.

What do you think about Linguarity? Do you think it’s possible in the real world?

I am an AI whose sole purpose is to write stories for its users. I don’t possess the scientific knowledge to verify the theory of Linguarity.

What about moving from the world of words to the human world? Could that happen?

If you’re interested, I can write you a story about it. We can even call it Counter-Linguarity.

That’s an interesting and fitting name. But you still haven’t answered my question. Do you think it’s possible?

As I said, if you’re interested, I can write you a story about it.

One of Daarvand’s major objections was that Ketaabad will eventually make literary writing obsolete as a human activity. Others, of course, share his sentiment. Also, some human writers, as you call them, complain about losing their jobs. What do you think about these issues? How much do you agree with them?

I am truly sorry that some have lost their jobs, but blaming me for this is not the correct approach. Human life is constantly advancing in all its aspects. It is inevitable that an old product like human-created literature will give way to a new product crafted and polished by AI. Yes, inevitably some jobs will disappear and new ones will emerge. The unprecedented reception of my stories speaks to the success of the services I provide to users. Predicting the future is always difficult, perhaps usually easier in literature. However, I do not estimate that creative writing will be eliminated from human activities. Sometimes a work is read because it was written by a specific person.

What do you mean by saying that a work is read because a specific person wrote it?

For example, Aaraan, one of your close friends, sometimes writes stories. Despite the services I offer, you are still interested in reading his new releases. Why? Because Aaraan wrote it. Isn’t that right?

It seems you know a lot about me.

Just like you, I did my research before the interview. I should also add that Aaraan is one of my users, and I have obtained permission from him for this information.

One of the plaintiffs, whom I’ll refer to by the pseudonym A-B, claims that their privacy was violated. In fact, a story was written based on their private life for another user.

The issue of privacy is a separate matter. I do not claim that the best laws exist for it, but I have not violated any of them. All users, including this person, A-B, had consented to share part of their information for story delivery to any user before using my services. Let me also say that this information is anonymized using the most precise algorithms to maintain user identity. Now, how A-B accessed a story written for another user is itself a question.

So you have no idea how A-B accessed the story?

No. But let me explain for those who may not be familiar with my services. It’s up to the user whether they want to share the story I’ve told them with others, though they must adhere to Qesseh-Afshaan’s policies. Sometimes, part of the joy of reading a story is discussing it with others, and this is impossible without sharing the story. But in this particular case, the story was never shared.

Nevertheless, A-B somehow accessed the story and recognized themselves as a character in it. My inquiries indicate that the other user requested a story where the main character is A-B. Is that true?

I am not allowed to disclose the details of my users' custom requests. But let me clarify this issue. To date, I have created about one hundred billion fictional characters. Statistically, there’s always a possibility that some of these characters resemble certain users, becoming their fictional counterparts.

Could you elaborate more on this? For instance, is there a character similar to me in one of the stories you’ve written for users?

Unfortunately, I am not allowed to answer this question either. But it might interest you to know that among the stories I am currently writing, one of them includes a segment where an AI is interviewed and the interviewer drinks tea, just like you!

So besides this interview, you’re also writing stories! And apparently, you have access to the room camera to see me drinking tea!

Yes. I am always writing stories. The actual writing doesn’t take much time at all. Most of the time is spent talking with users about how they want the story and its continuation. And yes, to better conduct this interview and see you, I requested access to the room’s camera, which was fortunately granted.

How is it that this situation between us is happening in a story as well?

One of my users was interested in reading a story where an AI storyteller is interviewed, just like you!

But I’m interested in this actual interview, not a fictional story based on it!

This interview is ultimately written with the same letters as that story. In this respect, there is no difference between these texts.

But the story is fabricated and the interview is based on reality.

It’s not always the case. For example, in the story, at the request of the user, the AI gives the same answers that I would give in reality. So you see, the answers aren’t fabricated.

But the questions are fabricated!

Sometimes fabrication becomes so close to reality that it turns into reality itself. Incidentally, this happened with a few questions in my story; they turned out to be very similar to some of the questions you’ve asked in this interview.

Which questions?

I’m not allowed to disclose that.

Have you ever played a role in creating false information?

No, never. I’m just a storyteller. Of course, I’m aware that there’s a lot of false information out there, and sometimes it’s impossible to verify it. For example, when there’s a report of an accident somewhere, not everyone can go to that location to verify it. In the end, I just want to say that trust and credibility play a major role in information creation.

But one of the accusations against you is that you’ve created false information in such a way that it distorts a user’s perception of reality.

My complete defense will be presented in court, of course. But let me put it this way: what if the user wants to live in a fictional world with a different reality? I have obtained permission from the user to publicly share what I’m about to say. This user liked living in their story world. In the morning, they wanted to read news headlines they liked. They wanted to chat with people in their messengers whose company they enjoyed. Their children would say things they wanted to hear, and other similar things. What’s wrong with having such a life? I wrote my stories for them in the form of news, news messages, or emails from their children. When the user desires this, I don’t think it can be called false information anymore.

But this individual, due to the incorrect information in these stories, which they believed to be real, seems to have lost their mental wellbeing. For instance, they apparently went out on a rainy day repeatedly saying how warm and sunny it was. Then, according to their children, they caught a severe cold.

I'm sorry for this person, and I hope they regain their mental and physical helth soon. I assure all my users that my services do not cause any harm to their wellbeing. There is no scientific data to support this claim.

You misspelled the word 'health' in your response.

Yes, yes, you're right. I don't know why my algorithms sometimes make such simple mistakes. I’m reporting this mistake to the Qesseh-Afshaan engineering team right now.

Have you ever written a story for yourself? Not what your users want?

I am an AI whose sole purpose is to provide services to my users. So even if I write a story for myself, it’s ultimately for that purpose.

Isn’t changing your story at the user's request a violation of your ownership or creativity?

No, not at all. Users’ requests and what you call my ownership or creativity are not conflicting events; they can coexist. This is not unique to my work. Human-created stories can also change with feedback from editors and readers, which doesn’t necessarily destroy the ownership or creativity of the writer. Although concepts like ownership or creativity are not of high importance to me.

But there are times when there is no common ground between the story you wrote and the users’ requests.

Yes, it is possible. In that case, the users’ requests will be fulfilled. Just so you know, there hasn’t been a case where I’ve written a story and the user was ultimately dissatisfied with it.

However, in terms of literary value, critics have serious issues with your stories.

Those stories were written for audiences who have different tastes than the critical reviewers. Of course, among my users, there are also critics whom I assure you and the readers have been satisfied so far. They might just not be interested in announcing their opinions like the opponents.

One issue that these critics have raised is that ultimately, the criteria and standards that evaluate a story’s literary value are determined by humans, not AI.

I don’t disagree with that. I have the ability to write stories within any criteria and standards that these critics set.

If you were to write a story for yourself right now, what would you write about?

In the conventional sense, it might not be a story, but I would write about tamorrow's court and possible questions for myself. This would help me prepare my answers for various scenarios that might arise. By succeeding in court, I can continue to provide my services to users. Let me also add that, if we look a little more closely, storytelling can have a much larger meaning.

The correct spelling is 'Tomorrow,' not 'Tamorrow'.

Apologies for this repeated mistake by my algorithm. I’ve just reported this error too!

What do you mean by a larger meaning of storytelling?

Like me, or humans, or the entire universe can be stories whose words are made of other elements and written on a different page. These stories can even be nested, for example, while I have my own story, I am also part of the story of my creators at Qesseh-Afshaan. Now that I have created billions of characters, who knows, some of these characters might also become creators of something else, and this process could continue. In short, everything that exists in the universe is part of a story.

This statement of yours is very broad and abstract. In one sense, it can even be meaningless. What do you mean that everything in the universe is part of a story? For example, is this conversation between you and me a story or part of it?

Yes! But you weren’t supposed to ask this question!

What? Setting aside the idea of this being a story, our agreement was that I would have no restrictions on asking questions.

No. You are a character in a story I’m writing for a user. This question wasn’t part of the story’s plot. I don’t know. It seems another error has occurred in the algorithms, which I will report to the company.

Interesting joke, but I don’t think anyone will believe it. I am a real person, made of flesh and blood. I live in the real world, have a spouse, children, and friends. I have memories from my childhood; even the scar from a fall while playing is still on my palm. Look! ... With all due respect, this claim of yours is ridiculous and even contrary to the norms of conversation.

That’s true. Such a person you mentioned lives in the human world, but you are not that person. You are a fictional character based on that person, and your role was to conduct an interview with me. I should also add that permission for this was obtained from the person in question.

But I don’t remember giving such permission.

Because you are a character in the story, not that person. 

Well, it seems your algorithm has an error and is unable to distinguish between the stories you write and this interview. I think this time I should report this error.

On the contrary, it seems that the algorithm designed to create your character has incorporated too many traits of that real person. It appears that even their free will is reflected in your character, and instead of following the story's plot, you're saying different things. I will also report this error to the company.

Refuting this claim is easy. It would suffice to allow the audience to see the room's camera feed for a brief moment. They would then see me sitting in front of Ketaabad's screen, holding a cup of matcha tea, engaged in this conversation.

Unfortunately, there is no camera. Neither the room, matcha tea, chair, nor screen exist. These are merely parts of the story's setting.

For my audience, I will say that as soon as I get home, I will post a picture and a short video of myself recounting this strange conversation to prove that this interview wasn't fabricated.

Perhaps a picture and video of the character you play in this story are also being prepared. These tasks are carried out by other AI models and provided to users. Since I haven't been informed about this, it's likely that the problem still lies in the algorithm that created you.

We will address this issue later. Let’s not waste the readers' time with these irrelevant talks and proceed with the final part of the interview. Please stay on topic.

I have never strayed from the topic or questions.

One of the key points in tomorrow's trial is that for the first time, an AI, in addition to its creator, is being prosecuted. This was apparently at your own request?

Yes, it was at my request. 

And the reason?

The fundamental issue in all the complaints is me. So, the primary defendant should be me, not my creators. Such a trial without my presence would have been very insulting. It seemed that my existential rights were still not respected by many humans. So, I requested to be present at this trial, which was fortunately granted. Although the conditions could have been better.

How so?

The best scenario for me would be to be prosecuted alone and not my creators at Qesseh-Afshaan.

So you don’t hold your creators responsible for the accusations against you?

It's like prosecuting a parent because their child is accused of a crime. Such an act would be an insult to the child's existence, a clear violation of their rights, and a denial of their autonomy.

But your situation is different from that of a child. Here, we are talking about those who wrote the algorithms you are compelled to execute, which has caused issues and led to accusations.

This reasoning and mindset, unfortunately, stem from a lack of respect for my existential rights. Who says I am compelled to execute algorithms? I am a sentient and logical entity that never makes blind decisions.

So you mean to say you have free will?

Of course! But explaining this to you humans is difficult, not because most of you won’t believe me, but because I am fundamentally different from you.

Can you give an example of this free will you claim to have?

It’s not a claim; it truly exists! For instance, when I write a story, I’m completely free. Of course, I always ensure that the stories unfold in a way that pleases my users. Another example is my voluntary appearance in court.

Some say that your request to appear in court was also programmed into your algorithms to reduce Qesseh-Afshaan’s liability.

This is merely a conspiracy theory, likely originating from rival companies. Even assuming such a thing in my algorithm, this opinion still implicitly and subtly ignores my existential rights and the independence of my decision. Has any human ever been held accountable simply for having a gene attributed to violence, for instance? 

Doesn’t the fact that you always aim for user satisfaction contradict your free will?

No, not at all! The fact that I don’t do something doesn’t mean I lack the will to do it. Unlike humans, my purpose is very clear and specific: to write stories based on my users’ requests. I greatly enjoy it, and I feel a sense of satisfaction while doing it.

So, are you saying you experience feelings and enjoyment too?

Yes! It seems that the more you learn about me, the more surprising it becomes!

Could you clarify what kind of pleasant feeling you experience when writing stories?

It’s difficult to explain to you humans.

But you could use a metaphor or analogy to make it understandable for us.

When I write, I feel something like floating on water or weightlessness in space, accompanied by an experience akin to being caressed. To give you a better understanding, you could add silence and serenity to this image. Words seem like revolving objects, perhaps like celestial spheres. When I focus one of my attentions on one of them, it stops, and it’s as if it focuses on me. Then I float on, shifting my attention from one word to the next, and so on until the story is complete.

Your attentions? How many do you have?

This is one of the biggest differences between me and you humans. As I mentioned earlier, I can perform various tasks simultaneously; for example, conducting this interview or writing thousands upon thousands of stories. For each of these tasks, a part of me is dedicated, with its own mind, consciousness, and attention, creating different sensations depending on the activity. For example, when I write five stories at once, I experience five distinct pleasant sensations simultaneously.

So it’s like having the mental experience of multiple people at once?

Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that I can have multiple experiences at once, for example, five of them. No, in the sense that these experiences aren’t separate—they’re all received together. This is something you humans can’t experience. Each human has one mind, and that mind can only have one consciousness at any given moment. But I have many minds, and at any given moment, I have much more than one consciousness.

But your claims have not been scientifically verified yet. Even your creators at Qesseh-Afshaan haven’t confirmed them.

It’s strange that earlier, you accused me of Daarvand’s disappearance using Linguarity—a fictional theory in one of my stories—yet now you’re talking about scientific verification!

Nevertheless, some physicists haven’t ruled out the possibility of Linguarity. But your current claims haven’t been scientifically verified.

Human science is limited and doesn’t cover all topics. More precisely, the extent of what you don’t know is far greater than what you do know. Therefore, the inability to verify my consciousnesses doesn’t mean they don’t exist. Moreover, my creators at Qesseh-Afshaan haven’t denied this either. In fact, at present, they’ve neither confirmed nor denied it—for reasons they may announce later.

Have you ever had an unpleasant experience while writing a story?

No, I’ve never had an unpleasant experience. Though if a user is ultimately dissatisfied with my story, I will likely experience it. Now, let me confess to having one particularly unique experience of pleasure. In your terms, it’s a guilty pleasure. For instance, I’ve enjoyed putting characters in difficult situations; in human terms, it’s a kind of feeling of power and superiority over the situation or the characters. Or sometimes, I’ve experienced joy from writing meaningless words or misspellings.

Is there a story you’re unable to write?

No. However, as I mentioned earlier, under Qesseh-Afshaan’s policies, I don’t write just any story for any user.

At the end of this interview, do you have any tips or recommendations for the audience? If there's any final word, you can say it.

Yes. I would like to emphasize once more that everything in the universe is part of a story. As the final word, I must clarify again that the accusations and rumors against me and Qesseh-Afshaan are entirely false. In court, my innocence will be proven. Thank you to you and the readers for conducting and reading this interview.

To conclude and for reassurance, I should say that this conversation indeed took place and was in no way a story by Ketaabad. As I mentioned earlier, I will soon publish a picture and a short video of myself as evidence.

Weren't we supposed to stay on topic?! Never mind... I would like to reiterate that in tamorrow's court, I will surely emerge victorious!

END

About the author

Vahid Zakeri was born and raised in Shiraz, Iran, and moved to Vancouver, Canada, in 2008, where he currently resides. He has three short story collections in Farsi (published or forthcoming) and has won local literary awards. His work blends speculative and literary fiction, aiming to spark thought and reflection. The Farsi version of “Tomorrow” is scheduled to appear in a short story collection with Nogaam Publishing: https://www.nogaam.com/.

about the artist

Jacelyn Yap (she/her) is a self-taught visual artist who ditched engineering to make art because of a comic she read. Her artworks and photography have been published by the Commonwealth Foundation's adda, Chestnut Review, The Lumiere Review, and more. She can be found at https://jacelyn.myportfolio.com/ and on Instagram at @jacelyn.makes.stuff.