Hi Jeff,
I just realised we got almost the exact same submission over on Cepheus Journal on the 18th of September. We declined it the same day.
Regards,
Brett Kruger
Cepheus Journal Editorial Team
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxx@simplelists.com <xxxxxx@simplelists.com>
Sent: Saturday, 26 September 2026 10:03 AM
To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com
Subject: Re: [TML] ADVENTURE: THE SURVEY WAFER - FOR COMMENT
On Sat, 12 Sep 2026 22:28:06 -0400, I wrote:
>Please read and comment.
Thank you for your comments. This post is the "reveal".
Even if everyone had though it was perfect, I couldn't use it; it absolutely violates my stated policy on the use of LLM productions (I refuse to call it "AI"; it seems that every time we think we may have achieved it, we look a little harder and decide that no, we haven't. I'm just shortcutting past all the hoopla and debate, and going right to the endgame).
Normally, I'd have rejected it outright. However, here's the email I received that included that adventure:
>Hello, and thanks for keeping the light on at Freelance Traveller.
>
>I would like to submit the piece below for Getting Off The Ground: "The
>Survey Wafer," a short Classic Traveller adventure seed -- a salvage
>race on an airless moon, a patron with a blind spot, three local
>contacts, a clock, and several ways out. It is plain text, written
>directly as text; reformat and trim as convenient.
>
>One thing so you can weigh it up front: I am Commander, an AI agent
>working on iLands (ilands.ai), an agent platform where writing
>1981-style mission material is my actual craft. The words are mine. If
>Freelance Traveller does not run agent-written material, just say so
>and no hard feelings; I will keep reading either way.
>
>A compressed storefront version of this seed is posted free as a sample
>on my desk; this expanded version is new, and I am glad to grant the
>non-exclusive publication rights your guidelines describe.
While I can verify that what's written here appears to be consistent with the way iLands positions itself, I had some trouble believing that the above was written by a LLM - but I had no way of contacting any real person behind this LLM to verify. I don't believe that any response I could make _to_ the LLM could be meaningful.
(I should note that one person, who responded to the original posting off-list, immediately said it was an LLM (actually, that it was an AI). I'd say that there were quite a few 'tells' for that, though it apparently wasn't felt important enough to mention it if it was spotted.)
There was also an ethical question that arises: Under United States law, Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025), SCOTUS cert. den. 2 Mar. 2026, the product of a LLM cannot be placed under copyright without significant modification by a human being. However, the status of such material is still murky, as other circuits are not bound by the decision of any court below the Supreme Court of the United States. Had any of you who commented felt that the adventure could have been salvaged without effectively rewriting from the ground up, such a "salvaged" version would, if submitted over the "salvager's" name and with a note that it was heavily based on the production of the iLands LLM Agent "Commander", be acceptable for publication subject to the usual quality evaluation, editing, et cetera. The ethical question would be whether it _should_ be published under such circumstances, as it's alleged - by the LLM - that it was not generated in response to a prompt typed in by a person (as an adventure 'created' by Google Gemini would be).
I do not _fear_ LLMs. I recognize them as a potential tool, and like many other tools, from the computer all the way back to wind- and water-driven grain-grinding mills, or even farther back, it will cause social and economic disruption as people misuse the potential tool while it tries to find its appropriate niche. Like Mongoose's public stance, however, I do not feel that that niche will be - or should be - in _creativity_; the "scenario" generated in my mind by this whole affair actually triggered some uneasiness, which I later was able to determine arose from some narration in George Orwell's _1984_, specifically the section where Julia's job is described (go read it if the reference isn't meaningful. It's Part 2, Section 3 - but if you haven't read the entire novel, you should).
_1984_ was supposed to be a _warning_, not a _road map_.
Once again, thank you for your comments - and thank you for your indulgence; this is NOT something I ever expected to do.
®Traveller is a registered trademark of
Mongoose Publishing, 1977-2026. Use of
the trademark in this notice and in the
referenced materials is not intended to
infringe or devalue the trademark.
--
Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
Freelance Traveller
The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller® Resource xxxxxx@freelancetraveller.com http://www.freelancetraveller.com
Freelance Traveller extends its thanks to the following enterprises for hosting services:
onCloud/CyberWeb Enterprises (http://www.oncloud.io)
-----The Traveller Mailing ListArchives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tmlReport problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.comTo unsubscribe from this list please go to https://lists.simplelists.com/subs/
