Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The computers are getting better at writing

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 165 posts

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#111

Post by Kelamir »

DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #84
caconym_ wrote: post #66

The lesson we should take from GPT-3 is that we spend way too much time reading text that isn't really saying anything, and/or failing to find meaning in what we read. It's a neat trick, and I think it could absolutely replace much or most of the writing on the internet today. But is it good writing? No, not really. At least, not in the sense of writing as producing anything more substantive than slick prose with a v…

> But is it good writing? No, not really. agree. I'd say it's impossible to solve. Where would we even place our yardsticks: Has society been able to get any better (than we used to) at assessing and categorizing what "constitutes" great writing? If so in what relation could that be measured to our past performance especially that many no longer read today due to our loss of attention span? (most won't even read this…

> (most won't even read this comment because it's way too long).

I admit I was going to skip it, but I saw a reference to a James Joyce's book and reconsidered :)

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#112

Post by Nav_Panel »

caconym_ wrote: post #66

The lesson we should take from GPT-3 is that we spend way too much time reading text that isn't really saying anything, and/or failing to find meaning in what we read. It's a neat trick, and I think it could absolutely replace much or most of the writing on the internet today. But is it good writing? No, not really. At least, not in the sense of writing as producing anything more substantive than slick prose with a v…

It's funny, I think using Twitter helped me with this. Forced me to condense large thoughts into small spaces, learning to cut through the reddit-comment fluff. High-density writing. Will be harder for an AI to replicate.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#113

Post by username90 »

goodpoint wrote: post #95
caconym_ wrote: post #66

The lesson we should take from GPT-3 is that we spend way too much time reading text that isn't really saying anything, and/or failing to find meaning in what we read. It's a neat trick, and I think it could absolutely replace much or most of the writing on the internet today. But is it good writing? No, not really. At least, not in the sense of writing as producing anything more substantive than slick prose with a v…

Many (human-written) books and articles are 10% content and 90% fluff and repetition. The articles shared on HN are a good example. If the goal is to increase the SNR, GPT-3 is probably not going to help.

Which is why we read comments and not articles. Articles are full of fluff, comments for some reason aren't.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#114

Post by NoOneNew »

bertil wrote: post #69
caconym_ wrote: post #66

The lesson we should take from GPT-3 is that we spend way too much time reading text that isn't really saying anything, and/or failing to find meaning in what we read. It's a neat trick, and I think it could absolutely replace much or most of the writing on the internet today. But is it good writing? No, not really. At least, not in the sense of writing as producing anything more substantive than slick prose with a v…

If you want to echo the last paragraph of the article, the system also doesn’t know when to stop. Which leads to a simple improvement: teach the model when to stop, what sections to remove. There’s already great ML-based summary engines, and systems able to answer questions from descriptions.

Yea, but that misses the point to all the qualms against the idea that this is "good writing". I know the name of this eassy structure changes depending on region and generation, but 3.5 essay structures teaches you the basic principles of "good writing". What are you arguing, quickly overview your 3 points to prove it, next 3 paragraphs explain and support each point, then a conclusion paragraph. Super simple, basic and on the nose writing to help teach kids how to write WITH PURPOSE. ML based writing doesn't even come close to this. It's just good at the statistical chance of what words follow each other. It's a keyword hound that has some notion of what makes a sentence "look real".

People who are afraid of the current generation of ML writing are absolutely dogshit writers with terrible taste in writing. I keep forgetting who said this, but theres a saying to never start writing by describing the weather. Lots of folks miss the point to this. You could modernize it by saying, "Dont start talking about your childhood when writing a recipe." Why? Because no one fucking cares. They want the recipe. Not a description of your childhood or what the weather was like. Take the time to notice articles and "journalist writing". If it starts with the weather, notice how incredibly long it takes for the author to get to the point or describe anything functionally meaningful. You'll notice these articles are extremely long in word count and extremely low in actual information/content. These are the people afraid because yes, a machine can keyword drop and fluff better than them.

Is it possible that there will be a future AI/ML to write with purpose? Maybe. But realistic idea connection and logical flow is still a huge hurdle for AI/ML. Summary engines seem good on the surface, but again, if you actually read them for a real world reason, not for "look how good ML is", you'll notice they're as meaningful as a politician running for office. Lots of keywords, lots of nothing really said or done... just like anyone with a liberal arts degree.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#115

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #90

I have a suspicion that, since GPT-3 gorged its enormously swollen fuzzy digital belly on a lot of real prose, it might, when prompted, occasionally throw in a piece of the prose in question, or a whole original passage, because to its fitting function, it would be a suitable thing to do. But then again, aren’t we all doing the same, regurgitating bits and pieces that we heard or read before and liked? Don’t we all s…

>> But then again, aren’t we all doing the same, regurgitating bits and pieces that we heard or read before and liked?

We can do that. We can also not do that. Language models can only do that.

My comment is stripped of nuance (language models don't do that exactly) but it should point at the difference: humans can be as dumb as bricks, or as smart as humans. Language models don't even come close to our brighter moments. They don't even come close to the brighter moments of our pets, and our pets can't generate human language.

You have kids? Think of whom you'd like to spend the next decade or two around: a five year old human or GPT-3? Which one would you find more interesting, original, curious, do you think?

I think people who are the most excited about GPT-3 are the ones who are used to even dumber, more boring interactions with computers than the repetitive and unoriginal text generation of language models. Or perhaps it's humans who are used to boring interactions with other humans. Technology has done some weird things to us of late I fear.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#116

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

adamauckland wrote: post #78
camillomiller wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a fellow non-native who accepted not to strive for full assimilation, my suggestion is to do the same. You can refine your writing by reading a lot. Books like “The elements of style” and “On writing well” can help with grasping those structural elements you might be struggling to identify. Apart from that, our brain has been shaped by our native language, and we can’t really delete that. Which is great news! It m…

I wanted to write a message to a Swedish relative to say "Happy Birthday" but the literal translation felt wrong. I asked my wife how to say "Happy Birthday" and she said "What you've got there is the right translation but that's not what people say". I think that's one of the hardest things about learning another language is to not directly map words but understand what would be said in a certain context. There is n…

You know what I struggle with? Writing professional letters (or email) in my native language. I went to university and worked in the industry in the UK and so I only ever had to write in a professional style in English. I was trying to ask for some information from an online shop in Greek the other day (I'm Greek) and I found I had no idea how to start and end the email and how exactly to phrase the question I wanted to ask without sounding like I was talking to my bestie.

Kind of the reverse situation than what you're describing, because I haven't learned to say those things in my native language, but for me it goes to show we learn lots of pre-baked turns of phrase that we adjust appropriately to the context when we need them.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#117

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

camillomiller wrote: post #92
Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's useful to learn how they say it, though. Not because we should pretend to be native speakers when we aren't, but because language is more efficient if you know the expected way to use it. The correct but awkward sentences from non-natives (I also use them, being a non-native English speaker) will more easily get lost in situations with background noise, several people talking, people not paying a lot of attentio…

True, but OP was asking for an AI tool to help in this. I think the language bias on such a tool would be enormous, and it would contribute to flatten a piece of writing. Being effective by saying things the right way, or picking the right words to express a specific context, is definitely important. My point was this: once you get to a good-enough point, what you're looking for is an editor (of sorts, not necessaril…

>> One clear example: attributive nouns.

Specific examples, please? I'm curious :)

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#118

Post by btrettel »

isaacimagine wrote: post #109
jcims wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do the same thing when I write (except for my comments on HN lol) GPT-3 reads like the unfiltered garbage that comes out of my head when I'm trying to get ideas out. The primary difference is that I have empathy for the audience so I go through the effort to reread, clean it up, clear it up then cut it down. But that secondary editing process has nothing to do with the subject matter or initial content generation p…

> Basically when I write, I'm not trying to generate text, I'm trying to generate training data that will amend foreign models with a high fidelity representation of a subset of mine. Well said! Replying so I can find this thread again, please ignore.

In the future, rather than cluttering up the thread, bookmark the page in your browser or use the "favorite" button here on HN.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#119

Post by adamauckland »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #116
adamauckland wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted to write a message to a Swedish relative to say "Happy Birthday" but the literal translation felt wrong. I asked my wife how to say "Happy Birthday" and she said "What you've got there is the right translation but that's not what people say". I think that's one of the hardest things about learning another language is to not directly map words but understand what would be said in a certain context. There is n…

You know what I struggle with? Writing professional letters (or email) in my native language. I went to university and worked in the industry in the UK and so I only ever had to write in a professional style in English. I was trying to ask for some information from an online shop in Greek the other day (I'm Greek) and I found I had no idea how to start and end the email and how exactly to phrase the question I wanted…

That's interesting because you're right, in English there are different voices depending on the context and who you're talking to. Is it a professional context or casual or if you're supposed to be doing something important or tactful.

In some countries, this is extended to even using different languages depending on the context, especially more in the Eastern countries.

Re: The computers are getting better at writing

#120

Post by WesolyKubeczek »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #115
WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #90

I have a suspicion that, since GPT-3 gorged its enormously swollen fuzzy digital belly on a lot of real prose, it might, when prompted, occasionally throw in a piece of the prose in question, or a whole original passage, because to its fitting function, it would be a suitable thing to do. But then again, aren’t we all doing the same, regurgitating bits and pieces that we heard or read before and liked? Don’t we all s…

>> But then again, aren’t we all doing the same, regurgitating bits and pieces that we heard or read before and liked? We can do that. We can also not do that. Language models can only do that. My comment is stripped of nuance (language models don't do that exactly) but it should point at the difference: humans can be as dumb as bricks, or as smart as humans. Language models don't even come close to our brighter mome…

> You have kids? Think of whom you'd like to spend the next decade or two around: a five year old human or GPT-3? Which one would you find more interesting, original, curious, do you think?

Kids and language models are very different kinds of "interesting". I like to be around my child, because I love her and it's good for the soul. If I only have one time slot and a choice who to spend it with, GPT-n can go pound sand, I'll be with my kid.

A language model can certainly be fascinating in other ways. It brings me into a philosophical mood and spurs some questions about the humanity and quality of human knowledge, and efficiency of passing ideas around, but those don't imply answers I'd like to have, and tend to eat my soul away.

Post reply on HN