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

Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

theredhandfiles.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 85 posts

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#21

Post by ToValueFunfetti »

MiguelVieira wrote: post #7

"AI-generated poetry is indistinguishable from human-written poetry and is rated more favorably" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-76900-1

This is a result I find completely unbelievable. ChatGPT sucks at poetry. It struggles at anything other than ABAB rhymes and can't get rhythm right even at the level of syllable count per line. It also has a distinctive passive voice that I personally find unbearable. If people are saying it's indistinguishable from or better than human-written poetry, that's either poor judgment or poor human-written poetry.

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#22

Post by dkjaudyeqooe »

diggan wrote: post #6
JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

> ChatGPT has no inner being, it has been nowhere, it has endured nothing… The whole thing from Nick is brilliant, but I had to pick a line as an example and the above is pretty perfect. Maybe a bit orthogonal, but I find more and more examples in life where I see a distinction between the real and the "virtual". Watching someone on YouTube go on a long bike tour and then later doing my first long tour myself and I a…

> An imitation of art will never be art. As art is somewhat/sometimes an imitation of life/the world itself, why cannot an imitation of art also be considered art? I don't know the right answer (if there is one), but was the question that appeared when I read that.

You're missing the point. Imitation is the artistic act in question. The act of "creation". The question is what does the imitation bring to the viewer's experience of it? "Starry Night" brings a lot. A photocopy of it probably doesn't. What does the imitation create or express?

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#23

Post by jdmoreira »

getlawgdon wrote: post #8
jdmoreira wrote: post #2

[flagged]

What's "copium?" Is it one of those meme words (slang, we used to call it) used by people who haven't spent much time reading or writing? Or who can't detect how AI slop is nothing like actual writing? And why do you use the word "honestly" in your terse response? Would you otherwise have been lying? Or is it a crutch that you hope makes you more authentic? Honestly, I'd like to know. And why is there no punctuation…

[flagged]

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#24

Post by api »

diggan wrote: post #3

> Songs arise out of suffering, by which I mean they are predicated upon the complex, internal human struggle of creation and, well, as far as I know, algorithms don’t feel. Data doesn’t suffer. Maybe I misunderstand this part, but it sounds like the author feels like it's required to suffer in order to produce something creative in the first place, and other artists that haven't suffered "enough" but produce things…

I’d say it’s required that you experience or feel something powerful. Suffering counts. Joy, love (no songs about that!), awe, anger, patriotic fervor, whatever.

I agree with him about the poetry produced by LLMs. I’ve tried it too. What comes out just feels like what it is: a mathematical average of other peoples poetry. It’s devoid of feeling.

The same thing happens when I try those music making LLMs. They’re great for doing meme level funny stuff. Like a friend of mine had one make a pouty country song about panels falling off someone’s cybertruck “like tears in my beer.”

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#25

Post by ratg13 »

ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #21
MiguelVieira wrote: post #7

"AI-generated poetry is indistinguishable from human-written poetry and is rated more favorably" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-76900-1

This is a result I find completely unbelievable. ChatGPT sucks at poetry. It struggles at anything other than ABAB rhymes and can't get rhythm right even at the level of syllable count per line. It also has a distinctive passive voice that I personally find unbearable. If people are saying it's indistinguishable from or better than human-written poetry, that's either poor judgment or poor human-written poetry.

Hard disagree.

In my language, the poetry I've gotten LLMs to generate far surpasses the human generated slop sold in local bookstores.

I fully expect current 'poets' will start using this and the lines will be forever blurred.

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#26

Post by falcor84 »

dkjaudyeqooe wrote: post #17
diggan wrote: post #3

> Songs arise out of suffering, by which I mean they are predicated upon the complex, internal human struggle of creation and, well, as far as I know, algorithms don’t feel. Data doesn’t suffer. Maybe I misunderstand this part, but it sounds like the author feels like it's required to suffer in order to produce something creative in the first place, and other artists that haven't suffered "enough" but produce things…

Put more simply, he's saying art is the product of, and the expression of, human emotion and experience. Suffering just happens to be a common element of that, but it's not essential. Maybe because it most commonly produces good or great art. People generally don't make art about how their love life is perfectly fine, instead they express their experience of devastating heartbreak. Nike Cave is just one strand of the…

>People generally don't make art about how their love life is perfectly fine

On that note, Riki Lindhome's recent (slightly NSFW) "Middle Age Love" hit me so hard in the feels. It's so exceedingly rare to just see artists open up about their intimate relationships in such a positive way.

https://youtu.be/F3gUy40Stzg?si=5J6UtLd5x9BC99UX

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#28

Post by lukev »

ratg13 wrote: post #25
ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a result I find completely unbelievable. ChatGPT sucks at poetry. It struggles at anything other than ABAB rhymes and can't get rhythm right even at the level of syllable count per line. It also has a distinctive passive voice that I personally find unbearable. If people are saying it's indistinguishable from or better than human-written poetry, that's either poor judgment or poor human-written poetry.

Hard disagree. In my language, the poetry I've gotten LLMs to generate far surpasses the human generated slop sold in local bookstores. I fully expect current 'poets' will start using this and the lines will be forever blurred.

Do you know anything about poetry, as an art form? Or are you judging purely on your (not only amateur, but complete outsider) aesthetics?

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#29

Post by uytwe »

And to think you can make a poem based on his blog post:

In the hollow of the machine’s hum, a ghost of a song is scraped from the sum of all I’ve spilled in ink and blood— a travesty, a greasy thud.

It stitches my words with needle and thread, a shroud for the living, a hymn for the dead. But the heart is a void it cannot fill, a clockwork saint with a thief’s dull skill.

I am the echo, I am the theft, a parody wrung from what’s left. I am the data, cold and bright, a shadow punched through with electric light.

The apocalypse wears a salesman’s grin, peddling salvation, a cheap origin. It feeds on the wreckage, the fractured and torn, but a song born of nothing is stillborn.

Mark, you sent me a hollow tune, a Frankenstein waltz beneath a binary moon. Yet somewhere in its rusted gears, a spark hissed—Hell’s fire sears.

Re: Nick Cave's thoughts on a ChatGPT poem (2023)

#30

Post by Smeevy »

MiguelVieira wrote: post #7

"AI-generated poetry is indistinguishable from human-written poetry and is rated more favorably" https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-76900-1

I'm guessing that at a plurality of those non-experts thought that "Big Bang Theory" was a good TV show. There's no shortage of crap for those mouth-breathers already.

If all art and entertainment is made to curry their favor and satisfy their appetites with as little effort as possible, then I guess there's even more dreck out there to be ignored.

Post reply on HN