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

31–40 of 85 posts

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

#31

Post by diggan »

lukev wrote: post #28
ratg13 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> Do you know anything about poetry, as an art form?

What kind of gatekeeping is this? Parent mentioned they're read poems from their local bookstores, does that mean they don't/do understand it "as an art form"? Does their opinion become more or less valid if they do understand it "as an art form"?

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

#32

Post by MrMcCall »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #13
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'm sure I am wading into dangerous waters here, but I kind of also think that "good" art, or perhaps I should say a particular kind of art that resonates with ones emotions, does come from the pain and suffering of the artist. It is because we also have known pain, jealousy, the death of a loved one, etc. that art sprung from that kind of suffering will "ring true". As I type this, I am looking at a painting on the…

Maybe he's referring to the suffering required to actually put the song together, from inspiration to pieces of structure to full structure to final polish.

Perhaps. I'm with you in your assessment, however.

These jazz folks didn't look they were suffering in doing this, but that doesn't mean their lives didn't have suffering before they gained acclaim and such incredible chops, or maybe they draw inspiration from the many people and cultures that have suffered:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pYHCGYJbw0

I'm also reminded of Stevie Ray Vaughan's dedication before he performed "Riviera Paradise" on Austin City Limits: "This one goes out to everyone who's still suffering in any way."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c_8VUL5jks

The beauty that was born from his suffering is certainly extraordinary, IMO, as is his song "Tick Tock", that he did with his brother Jimmy, in a message that should inspire us all on this day and going forward.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8uUTW9zPbM

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

#33

Post by airza »

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…

He is absolutely not saying that his songs are borne out of suffering in everyday life. I am losing my mind reading these comments.

The suffering he is talking about here is the frustrations and compromises of the artistic _process_, which llms short circuit entirely

No matter what the work is _about_, any art made by a human is going to encounter this feeling.

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

#34

Post by lukev »

This happens every time this topic comes up on HN.

A lot of commenters here apparently think that all "art" means is having an object that has a pleasing aesthetic.

Meanwhile every artist knows that art is defined by _intersubjectivity_... it comes _from_ an experiencing, feeling subject and is interpreted and by other, experiencing, feeling subjects.

So it doesn't actually matter if a lot of people who know nothing about poetry like ChatGPTs poems more than human ones. Because people who _actually_ care about poetry care about what is being said, and why, and what experiences are being conveyed. And that's something a LLM can't do.

My 10yo kid loves drawing and painting. He's still working on skill, getting better, but diffusion models are clearly much much better at rendering images of any style and subject.

But my kid makes art, and the model doesn't.

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

#35

Post by BLKNSLVR »

jstanley wrote: post #11

I'd recommend putting some information about you in your About page. It says that the site is for answering questions from your fans, but doesn't say who you are, what you do, or why you have fans. I can Google for "Nick Cave" but I can't tell which one you are.

Yeah nah.

This is genuinely one of those cases where if you know, you know. If you don't them you might find out eventually, but it's absolutely no skin off Nick Cave's nose if you never do.

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

#36

Post by tarr11 »

Swizec wrote: post #12
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…

> Of course, everyone creates things from their own perspective and context, but it kind of feels like a trap that somehow suffering is essential to the artistic process, which I personally don't feel would be a healthy perspective for myself as a musician at least. Suffering may be too strong a word. You have to feel something to make good art. There needs to be at least a kernel of something raw and real. That’s th…

I suspect that it wasn’t trained well enough on your art, or even trained to reproduce a generic style.

With enough data and training you might be convinced.

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

#37

Post by Telemakhos »

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…

> 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.

This sounds like confessional poetry of the mid-twentieth century. The 1960s and 1970s saw a lot of gatekeeping, especially in US and UK academia (like MFA programs), by which formal aspects of poetry were vilified and a foundation in lived experience became a requirement for something to be called a "poem." Needless to say those are entirely artificial takes on poetry, as all ancient poetry has strict metrical rules and presents an imitation of experience rather than lived experience. But, those were very convenient positions for their times, because they let certain people gatekeep others out of art.

When I listen first to an AI song and then Britney Spears or any other product of a culture industry, I don't hear much difference, except that I know the AI song will be inconvenient to the producers and bankrollers who profit from the culture industry.

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

#38

Post by fullshark »

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…

https://www.merriam-webster.com/slang/copium

Pretty good internet discourse word actually, cause there is a lot of rationalization everywhere you look online.

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

#39

Post by airstrike »

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, instead they express their experience of devastating heartbreak.

That's a common take, but I don't think it's really that accurate, otherwise we wouldn't have The Beach Boys

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

#40

Post by GolDDranks »

lukev wrote: post #34

This happens every time this topic comes up on HN. A lot of commenters here apparently think that all "art" means is having an object that has a pleasing aesthetic. Meanwhile every artist knows that art is defined by _intersubjectivity_... it comes _from_ an experiencing, feeling subject and is interpreted and by other, experiencing, feeling subjects. So it doesn't actually matter if a lot of people who know nothing…

Your point on intersubjectivity is spot on.
Post reply on HN