• kibiz0r@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I like the way Ted Chiang puts it:

    Some might say that the output of large language models doesn’t look all that different from a human writer’s first draft, but, again, I think this is a superficial resemblance. Your first draft isn’t an unoriginal idea expressed clearly; it’s an original idea expressed poorly, and it is accompanied by your amorphous dissatisfaction, your awareness of the distance between what it says and what you want it to say. That’s what directs you during rewriting, and that’s one of the things lacking when you start with text generated by an A.I.

    There’s nothing magical or mystical about writing, but it involves more than placing an existing document on an unreliable photocopier and pressing the Print button.

    I think our materialist culture forgets that minds exist. The output from writing something is not just “the thing you wrote”, but also your thoughts about the thing you wrote.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    That means in about 6 months or so the AI content quality will be about an 8/10. The processors spread machine “learning” incredibly fast. Some might even say exponentially fast. Pretty soon it’ll be like that old song “If you wonder why your letters never get a reply, when you tell me that you love me, I want to see you write it”. “Letters” is an old version of one-on-one tweeting, but with no character limit.