81–90 of 480 posts
Is the AI that writes "about as well as humans" in the room with us right now?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Huh that is an interesting metaphor. A next higher layer printing press? A printing press that does the thinking for you.
A thinking press?
Soon you won't be doing anything. At best you'll just be a bag of meat attached to automated processes you don't understand in order to take legal liability for it.
Literally a scapegoat, except of a different species.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a terrible analogy. It's quite clear that the author means AI writing is now good enough to cause confusion and speculation as to whether a given piece of writing was human-authored. The confusion and speculation caused by your nude transit adventure is about what the hell you're doing and why.
> now good enough to cause confusion and speculation since when is "confusion and speculation" an indicator of quality/goodness?
> maybe LLMs are seen to write as well as humans because most humans have poor reading comprehension skills?
Whoa, ironic.
I'd say the most likely scenario is that nobody read the damned book until after they awarded the contract, and then they immediately said "wait a minute..."
Writing for the love of art, besides being a mental and reflective exercise that holds real value when it is of high quality, makes it hard for me to believe that this is the end of literature. It is difficult to think that someone who writes for pleasure would abandon it simply because of the exponential volume of AI-generated text.
> holds real value when it is of high quality Does it? This assumption is the core of the entire problem. It might do as some, bluntly, self indulgent exercise but beyond that in society scarcity of things other people need and want is what drives value. We are in for an absolutely huge rebalancing of what it is that is considered valuable.
AI has made creating content almost free. What it hasn't done is add free hours to our day to consume all this new content. The number of people who want to read a book this month is roughly what it was five years ago, and roughly what it'll be five years from now.
Supply is exploding into demand that is stagnant (at best) or falling. Upload a book to Amazon today — good cover, sharp title, a blurb you sweated over for a week — and there is no longer any reasonable expectation of an organic sale. The book goes up, and then nothing happens, indefinitely.
Five years ago that wasn't true.
The answer is paid advertising. Buy your way onto the shelf. Stand out from the slop. But every writer is being given the same advice at the same moment, and there are only so many slots. The price of the slots must rise. And will keep rising for as long as there are writers able to pay.
The old metric was it takes about $5 to sell a book via paid advertising. I think in a year we'll look back on that figure fondly.
This is a well-known author, but how come he thinks AI is better at writing? AI writing makes me vomit. Also, I think he's too enthusiastic about the future of readers. In my opinion, reading books will be a very rare hobby pretty soon. The decline started more than 10 years ago.
There is likely a non empty set of writings that are AI written and that you don't recognize to be AI written.
I agree that the Ai-isms are ugly.
Butni also acknowledge that I am likely reading huge amounts of Ai text I don't attribute Ai.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A thinking press?
> A thinking press? Soon you won't be doing anything. At best you'll just be a bag of meat attached to automated processes you don't understand in order to take legal liability for it. Literally a scapegoat, except of a different species.