The computers are getting better at writing

And English, in its predatory way, will adopt those 'different' words and constructions as its own in due time :)

Founder of Sudowrite [1] here.

> However, if anything, GPT-3 is mostly showing how little meaning there is, but in how many words.

We imbue words and symbols with meanings, and we strive to give our stories meanings that transcend the prose on paper. Yes, it's true that GPT-3 can spout non-sequitars. But overall, it does stay on topic quite well, as compared to previous iterations like GPT-2.

But sometimes, you WANT that, you want to be provoked to get unstuck on writing that tough scene or character. I've found that using a system like Sudowrite is not only about generating new text, but reading the generations and discovering how the neural net is interpreting what you've written. I believe this particular use case hasn't been fully explored, outside of summarization algorithms.

[1] https://www.sudowrite.com/

Founder of Sudowrite here.

We are built on GPT-3 but we have a bunch of things we do on top that optimizes Sudowrite for the narrative fiction/non-fiction use case.

For example, we have a description tool that, given a highlighted phrase, gives you options for telling phrases in 5 senses and metaphorical uses. Another tool we have analyzes a story premise and gives you possible twist and story turns, based on the genre of your story, and also gives you possible characters that could inhabit that world, complete with both external and internal character descriptions.

I agree that for writing stories, the hard part is in the forest and not the trees (although this isn't true for everyone). And systems like GPT-3 can help with that, too, simply because it's level understanding of text is approaching that of a human.

Sorry, you said on pageload, I thought you meant when the page is loaded :)

On the cards you posted to reddit:

a) "Keening Vythat", "Tombsis Satyr", "Quarpling Barrier". These are typical nonsense-nonsense names (as opposed to the fantasy-nonsense names found on M:tG cards) that are typical, in my experience, of card names generated by language models trained at the character level. M:tG fantasy-nonsense names, like "Rathi", "Kapashen", "Viashino", etc, are derived from a real-world narrative created specifically to theme the cards. A backstory. Without such a backstory, "Vythat", "Tombsis", "Quarpling" are just random strings that have no reason to be used as names. This is an important limitation of this kind of card generation, especially given the very low chance that you'll see any more "Vythat" cards (and if you did, they'd likely have a completely different function). Also "Keening Vythat" sounds like a creature, rather than a Sorcery.

So, first problem: thematic consistency of names is all over the place.

b) The text on Keening Vythat is ungrammatical:

  Basic lands are basic land type in addition to its other types.

c) Seismic Mind has an interesting ability (the one that modifies its base P/T). The mana cost makes sense, actually (although I bet it'd end up at {4U} at R&D), and the effect is very Blue. Nice.

d) Tombsis Satyr also has an even more interesting ability (feeds the inner Johnny). The cost and colours are right and the Angel type is just the cherry on top. Very nice. If only it wasn't called "Tombsis Satyr"... X)

e) Quarpling Barrier's ability is more of a crippling weakness than an interesting ability. A creature without Defender would not be called a "Barrier" these days, either. Pass, I fear.

f) Trade Damage is more balanced than interesting, but it's very well balanced! It would fit very nicely in a modern tempo deck. Nice also.

So that's three nice, two not so nice and a bit of a problem with themes. Still, those are not that bad at all. Unfortunately, there's just five of them. At this point it's hard to tell whether your project is able to generate better cards than other projects - and why would it, if it's using the same tech as those projects? You can fine tune and turn more knobs, but what, fundamentally, is the innovation here?

I suggest that you add the five cards above (and/or others) to the colab of your project alongside the auto-generated ones, to have examples of the "best case" and "average case" together. That'll give a boost to the appeal of your project.

Anyway, better than I originally thought but still a ways to go.

i’m with you on the technical bit. in any style of writing where the goal is to concisely convey information, you’re definitely right that style doesn’t matter in most cases, so repeating words isn’t really something to avoid. to kinda piggyback off your anecdote, a lot of people trip into that pitfall of trying to make whatever they’re writing sound too unique, and in doing so, they (often inadvertently) add a layer of verbosity that adds wordiness instead of anything meaningful to what they’re trying to say.

my issue is that i reuse adverbs and adjectives within a few sentences of one anther and simply don’t notice it — like saying “rain fell in gentle waves,” then a sentence or two later, “the tide rolled in, soft, gentle, crashing against…” it just feels.. lazy, unimaginative to me. i read somewhere that it’s a quirk of the brain (perhaps only for some people, i don’t remember) where words in immediate memory get looped and “stuck” there. that seems to be what happens when i write, and it chaps my ass.