Tangentially related, but what a snappy webpage
Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
151–160 of 265 posts
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#152Thank you for sharing this. I do think book prizes are a better-than-average signal but I previously volunteered with a book award. I will caution that pretty much every publisher mass-submits these books for consideration in every remotely relevant prize. It is a cost of doing business (similar to how photographers pay to enter photography competitions to try and win the "award winning photographer" title, or busine…
Same thing with beer and wine awards, some are good but most are just a paid promotion lottery.
Which are the good ones in your view?
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#153The history section of the book price index is incredibly america-biased. History of america, american natives, japan after ww2 and vietnam in the last century.
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#154Not to be intentionally contrarian, but I have thought a lot about this: I think good fiction is actually the antithesis of AI, fundamentally. LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output. This can give you some creative results, but it is ultimately kind of limited. I cannot imagine that prompting an AI a thousand times would give you something truly original in the way many high-quality fi…
LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output
it's a real question. I've seen a lot of people stating that the human mind "is more than this" as if it was obvious
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#155Not to be intentionally contrarian, but I have thought a lot about this: I think good fiction is actually the antithesis of AI, fundamentally. LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output. This can give you some creative results, but it is ultimately kind of limited. I cannot imagine that prompting an AI a thousand times would give you something truly original in the way many high-quality fi…
> LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output
> The magic and absurdity of life is a necessary thing to create such works.
These two points seem slightly conflicting. Why if a human is truly more creative than AI, must it experience "the magic and absurdity of life" if it can be creative without "combining things into output"? Is a creative human then just not splicing and recombining their experiences into their creative output? And therefore, if an AI had more data that mirrors that experience in some way would it be sufficiently creative to create something "truly original"?
My view is that intelligence and creativity is all just purely recombination. AI can do that well just as humans can. The gap is that the data humans have access to is much more analogue, emotional, and grounded in the real world compared to the data that AI is currently trained on.
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#156Thanks for making this, I searched up economics and found at least 3 titles that , when reading through first pages, are really really interesting.
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#157Not to be intentionally contrarian, but I have thought a lot about this: I think good fiction is actually the antithesis of AI, fundamentally. LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output. This can give you some creative results, but it is ultimately kind of limited. I cannot imagine that prompting an AI a thousand times would give you something truly original in the way many high-quality fi…
LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output what makes believe humans can do more than this ? it's a real question. I've seen a lot of people stating that the human mind "is more than this" as if it was obvious
Well since human culture has developed from very limited stone age culture into what we have today, we must conclude that at least _some_ people are capable of generating something that is genuinely new.
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#158Not to be intentionally contrarian, but I have thought a lot about this: I think good fiction is actually the antithesis of AI, fundamentally. LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output. This can give you some creative results, but it is ultimately kind of limited. I cannot imagine that prompting an AI a thousand times would give you something truly original in the way many high-quality fi…
that is how humans do it too! they combine things, ideas.
you can make LLMs do that to
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#159Not to be intentionally contrarian, but I have thought a lot about this: I think good fiction is actually the antithesis of AI, fundamentally. LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output. This can give you some creative results, but it is ultimately kind of limited. I cannot imagine that prompting an AI a thousand times would give you something truly original in the way many high-quality fi…
> LLMs are really only capable of combining different things into output > The magic and absurdity of life is a necessary thing to create such works. These two points seem slightly conflicting. Why if a human is truly more creative than AI, must it experience "the magic and absurdity of life" if it can be creative without "combining things into output"? Is a creative human then just not splicing and recombining their…
> And therefore, if an AI had more data that mirrors that experience in some way would it be sufficiently creative to create something "truly original"?
An important distinction seems to lie in a human having original experiences to draw from, while an AI has only "data that mirrors" experiences.
Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop
#160I don't think we would have AI slop, if they were just trained on high quality media. Less relatable AI, maybe, but not sloppy AI. AI trained on other AI (i.e. distilling), can be better than the AI they were trained on, likely because of this reason. Each iteration can raise the bar. As apposed to the deep spiral of generating shiny attention crystals for humans, and then training on that.
Training AI on AI will most likely increase slop. LLM's add randomness in their outputs, books usually don't.