Live data from Hacker News

The End of an Era

hughhowey.com

131–140 of 480 posts

Re: The End of an Era

#132
post #46
post #16

AI writing is not good. Seeing this post, and another comment on here earlier today to the effect of “we’ve solved prose”, I’m genuinely really confused. I don’t want to be insulting, even if the first place my mind runs is basically people must not read very much or think very hard about what they read. I can’t imagine a world where anyone ingests a material amount of AI writing and things it’s even “acceptable”. Bu…

As someone who does a lot of writing, I ended up doing a lot of re-writing of what I'll call reference architectures in a previous role. I did use an LLM for some of the missing context up-front. It was essentially boilerplate and I did revise it--took out some things I didn't think important and added some things I thought might be. But I basically never use them for a blog post except maybe to include some boilerpl…

Perhaps this is a question of ethics. Should we come to a conclusion that human effort makes a text worth reading despite it's objective quality. Literacy is humanities by definition.

Re: The End of an Era

#133
post #10

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.

Default unspecifically-prompted AI writing makes you vomit, because it has a specific pattern. But with enough well-defined prompts AI can be made to write in practically any style, often with results unrecognizable as AI-generated.

Show me. AIvangelists love to say what AI can do, but never bother to provide any examples.

Re: The End of an Era

#134

What LLMs have shown me most, is: Alternatively most blog posts could have been paragraphs. Most books could have been single chapters. Most newspaper articles could have been tweets. That being said, most readers want you to hold your hand step by step. They don't want to the outline: they want you to give them a story. Most people and writers know this already. To me, it was new.

> Alternatively most blog posts could have been paragraphs. Most books could have been single chapters. Most newspaper articles could have been tweets. Why even read? Why even live? What's the point of all of this? Churches could be wooden shacks, 5 stars menus could be protein shakes, paintings could be single sentence descriptions, ... You might as well sign up to be put in an artificial coma, or in a matrix pod

I've colloquially coined this as the contentification of everything. The goal isn't to actually engage with something, whether it's the writing style, flavor, or artwork on display. It's purely about consumption, and the most optimal way of consuming something is distilling it down into a short, bland summary.

It's why there are people out there that will use an LLM to summarize a book and pretend that they read the whole thing because they know the general outline.

Re: The End of an Era

#135
> Artificial Intelligence is writing about as well as humans

Does he really hold on this until the end of the article? (sorry, I had no time to read through it). It doesn't matter how well and sophisticated the writing is, what counts is the human connection. A human is talking to me through the writing. I am not interested in having communication with a machine, I want the vibes only humans can send and receive …

Re: The End of an Era

#136

What if we remove the stigma of authors using AI. We say, have at it, use all the AI you want. What then? The market is still finite. The authors are still competing with each other. They will still have to be good at creating compelling books that people want to read. Will the whole thing just blow over and AI would be "just another tool" that authors use to get their work out?

That sounds to me like the most reasonable attitude. If a story is compelling for a certain person, why care about how it was created?

Part of the appeal of literature generally and the novel in particular is that it provides you with an incredibly intimate connection to the subjectivity of another person, though they may be long dead, or the speaker of another language, or from a far away part of the world that you would never be able to visit yourself.

Re: The End of an Era

#137

What if we remove the stigma of authors using AI. We say, have at it, use all the AI you want. What then? The market is still finite. The authors are still competing with each other. They will still have to be good at creating compelling books that people want to read. Will the whole thing just blow over and AI would be "just another tool" that authors use to get their work out?

Discoverability starts to break for new authors when more new books are published each day than humans on the earth.

Established authors have the name recognition to compete as you say.

Re: The End of an Era

#138
post #4

LLMs are writing as well as humans for people who think writing words is the goal. Printing presses also write words better than humans. LLMs are solving the problem one layer higher than printing presses, but still several layers down from the top. Note that LLMs aren't useless, since they have other strengths which can make them equal or better than humans in certain applications. For instance, they can tirelessly…

Finally, someone else understands that writing is not the goal, the entire point of all of this is our communications between one another and this market for narrative stories is a nice departure and it does convey important knowledge and moral lessons that larger society needs. But it is an indirection, an indirection to the mission of communicating solutions to how to live as a human and that is why we care, why th…

Many of us understood that, and tried to tell it over and over. My keyboard is worn, my mind is numb, my soul is weary from typing/telling that the output is not the aim, but the content it carries, the substance it holds.

Yet a very vocal group advocates integrating LLMs into every aspect of their lives, and the other group watch in dismay.

On the other hand, I used a sentence form used by LLMs in a comment during a morning-brain moment, and an angry mob tried to crucify me with torches and pitchforks.

Many people love to generate text with LLMs, but most of same crowd apparently hates to read LLM output. An interesting phenomenon.

Re: The End of an Era

#139

What if we remove the stigma of authors using AI. We say, have at it, use all the AI you want. What then? The market is still finite. The authors are still competing with each other. They will still have to be good at creating compelling books that people want to read. Will the whole thing just blow over and AI would be "just another tool" that authors use to get their work out?

As long as we add the stigma of them getting paid for their AI's effort too. Then it could absolutely work.

Why would there need to be a stigma for getting paid based on a tool they used?

Do other authors have a stigma for using a word processor instead of a typewriter?

Artist have a stigma for using photoshop instead of canvas?

Re: The End of an Era

#140

What if we remove the stigma of authors using AI. We say, have at it, use all the AI you want. What then? The market is still finite. The authors are still competing with each other. They will still have to be good at creating compelling books that people want to read. Will the whole thing just blow over and AI would be "just another tool" that authors use to get their work out?

As long as we add the stigma of them getting paid for their AI's effort too. Then it could absolutely work.

Surely having the idea and curating the result actually is work?

And pricing is determined by what someone else will pay for something, so if people want to read it and the author is charging for it . . . that's up to them if they want to make a trade about it.

The odd thing is this attempt at gatekeeping what other people value.

Post reply on HN