Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop • Hacker News Board

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#211

Post by keiferski » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:26 PM UTC

rahimnathwani wrote: post #207

keiferski wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you understand the premise of the question. Asking another person or Fable what it feels like to eat a hamburger will give you a description of what it feels like. It will not give you the actual feeling. You are merely repeating words that someone else has told you. The description of something is not equivalent to the experience that comes from doing it yourself, as an experiencing subject. Reading a…

I understand the premise. My answer was meant to illustrate that, no, the 'original experience' is not needed, and that AI can produce a good answer relying only on '"data that mirrors" experiences'.

It can provide a description. Not an actual answer of what it feels like.

I can't keep repeating myself.

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#212

Post by EGG_CREAM » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:29 PM UTC

exe34 wrote: post #166

snakeboy wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> while an AI has only "data that mirrors" experiences. True for a lot of current AI. With more robotic bodies, loads more access to cameras/audio/satellite/science measurements, an AI can have original experience on a level that can only be described as god-like compared to humans.

If it has a subjective viewpoint, i.e. sentience. Otherwise it still doesn’t actually experience any of those things, and can’t tell actually you what it’s like to experience those things. It can give you the data readings though.

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#213

Post by sigbottle » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:29 PM UTC

brrrrrm wrote: post #145

keiferski wrote: post #138

Not 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…

Models are increasingly showing their ability to extrapolate into the human unexplored (math proofs being the most apparent). What gives you confidence the absurdity of life is uniquely difficult for models to source?

I will readily admit that I didn't read Dostoevsky, and I don't continue to read Dostoevsky, because I've compared him against a swath of other fiction writers and authoritatively determined with some objective reproducible standard why his writing has been impactful and changed my life. I heard about Dostoevsky from a lot of people talking about depression when I was depressed, he resonated with me. Then when I came back to him half a decade later, having resolved more of my issues, I was able to evoke similar feelings but through a more mature lens.

Do I reflect on the objectively correct structure of the story? Do I "agree" with everything Dostoevsky is saying? Not really.

I don't know if this offends literature people or not. But this sure as hell is incompatible with the AI bro paradigm in which all thought can be objectively reduced to some shared standard to benchmark on.

My position will be read into as deep irrationality from many opposing positions, but it's fine.

Now, none of this doesn't "preclude* the ability for AI to have the same kinds of network effects. Of course it can - that's what I've been saying for the longest time. But don't confuse, becoming integrated with society, with this ideal of superhuman X.

Now of course, you could argue, "there is no such thing as anything else besides becoming integrated with society. There is no other standard that works." Very good! Darwinian-adjacnet positions are interesting. This is a position - but then don't claim it's equivalent, or god forbid, the exact same, as the "super AGI" ontology. These require fundamentally different assumptions about what justified what, and an attempt to try and pretend otherwise is sophistry.

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#214

Post by JKCalhoun » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:31 PM UTC

"To avoid the tedium, I decided that I would also flip to a random page of every book I shelved and read a random sentence from it."

Also, this is about the lost joy of "browsing".

I wonder how much serendipity played when wandering through a library (or other things in life—even window shopping). But now, everything on the internet, you more or less have to know what it is you're looking for—are rarely "surprised or delighted".

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#215

Post by brazzy » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:32 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #206

everdrive wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is actually a tough one. Yes, I agree that an LLM can never experience this. But -- when a real human needs to translate that experience back into words, it can actually do so just fine. In other words, when a real human needs to translate an experience into words to share it, A LOT of information is lost. The LLM might actually be better-suited for the the task in your example, even if the point you wer…

I don't think it's all that difficult. Language is not a 1-1 match to reality. Ergo any entity which is inherently language-only, will fail to accurately describe the experience.

Not if the only result you can judge is also language-only, and the entity has access to a large corpus of descriptions produced by people who have had the experience.

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#216

Post by JKCalhoun » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:34 PM UTC

jackbrookes wrote: post #155

keiferski wrote: post #138

Not 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…

"Is a creative human then just not splicing and recombining their experiences into their creative output?"

I do think so. The difference is that, even apart from synthesis, the creative human knows how to filter out the shit ideas from the clever, subtle ones—LLMs seem to just run with the first…um, thought that… um, comes out of their head.

I suspect knowing that you've on to something special probably does require "human experience", woe, melancholy, "the human condition", reflecting on the brevity of life…

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#217

Post by rahimnathwani » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:37 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #211

rahimnathwani wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the premise. My answer was meant to illustrate that, no, the 'original experience' is not needed, and that AI can produce a good answer relying only on '"data that mirrors" experiences'.

It can provide a description. Not an actual answer of what it feels like. I can't keep repeating myself.

It can provide an actual answer of what it feels like.

If I've understood you correctly, your objection is that this description is second hand, rather than being a description of the model's own feelings.

Like if I write a description of what it's like being a soldier in a war zone, despite never having been a soldier and never having been in a war zone. Perhaps I can write something plausible if I've read enough and use my imagination.

snakeboy (whose commend started this subthread) seems to claim that having real experiences (not just having learned of others' experiences through reading) is a prerequisite to creating something 'truly original'.

Is that your position also?

If so, is there any possible demonstration that could change your mind?

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#218

Post by JKCalhoun » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:37 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #138

Not 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…

"…truly original in the way many high-quality fictional stories are."

The older I get, the more "nothing new under the sun" returns again and again.

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#219

Post by amarant » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:38 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #138

Not 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…

Agreed! I find AI to be pretty decent at documenting and explaining technical stuff, which is a subgenre of non-fiction.

I once tried telling it to write a fantasy novel for me because I didn't know what to read next. Gave it some examples of books I have enjoyed in the past so it would have an idea of my taste...God was that awful. Absolutely terrible idea.

AI is not coming for fantasy authors jobs any time soon!

Re: Quality non-fiction books are the antithesis of AI slop

#220

Post by keiferski » Thu, Jul 23, 2026, 1:39 PM UTC

brazzy wrote: post #215

keiferski wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's all that difficult. Language is not a 1-1 match to reality. Ergo any entity which is inherently language-only, will fail to accurately describe the experience.

Not if the only result you can judge is also language-only, and the entity has access to a large corpus of descriptions produced by people who have had the experience.

Then you're just comparing descriptions, and you're also dependent on the language skills of the experiencers, and you're still stuck with the problem that language is not a complete map of reality. So an LLM may be able to give you the optimal description of a feeling, on par with what a person would give you; but it won't be equivalent to the actual feeling.