Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

tristrumtuttle.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 201 posts

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#191

Post by DonHopkins »

bjourne wrote: post #168
DonHopkins wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[GPT-3 Prompt] Humans were so far away from meeting their own potential when they invented religion, which distracted and headed them off on a long terrible violent intellectually dishonest wild goose chase in the opposite direction, from which they still haven't recovered. Here is their story: [GPT-3 Output] One day, a long time ago, a bunch of cavemen got together and decided that, since they didn't understand the…

I'm positive I have heard the story in the first completion before, just phrased differently. GPT-3 is perhaps not plagiarizing the exact phrasings here, but it is regurgitating someone else's explanation for how religion and society evolved. "They also decided that this god must be interested in them, since they were the only beings in the world that they knew about. They decided that this god must have given them i…

It comes directly from God, obviously! The only logical conclusion is that GPT-3 is God.

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#192

Post by mccorrinall »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #111
mccorrinall wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is amazing. “We use robot dogs to plant the fruits”

> This is amazing. It's Kafkaesque source material not withstanding, it was able to accurately emulate two of the most robotic sounding popular 'influencers,' with tons of ocntent to piece it all together, but and this is a caveat, the only realistic thing that came from it was when they briefly spoke over each other. Everything else seemed obviously fake. Consider this sounds nothing like the Elon you see on the mos…

I found it amazing in the sense that I wouldn’t even come up with sentences like this under influence :D I just think it’s funny.

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#194

Post by V-2 »

saynay wrote: post #165
V-2 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may be slow, especially by machine standards, but they do occur. Their pace isn't really relevant to my point. And humans are trained on the same; unlike AI, we don't have any external supply of art to rely on : ) At any given time, all we have is what we've already created so far

I would actually say that humans have an enormous extra set of data that we, as people, are "trained" on. We walk around in our daily lives, seeing things constantly, and that influences our perception of art. Art is always a product of the broader context it was made in (social, environmental, etc). Something that gets accepted or praised today might very well not have been 200 years ago. One of the things that is i…

That's true, but this is exactly the unsurpassable limitation of AI's creativity.

It can generate art out of art. It can do it exquisitely well. But it lacks experiential/social inspiration. This component only comes from recycling here.

(Without the atmosphere of industrializing 19th century Central Europe - we have no Kafka. You can't simply generate Kafkauesqueness out of pre-existing literature.)

And that's why I refuse to believe AI can be creative in a meaningful sense of the word.

Obviously it's not AI's "fault", so to speak, but that's kind of beyond the point :)

PS. I can imagine - now we're going far into the realm of s-f - truly sentient AIs producing art that's genuinely creative. Art actually stemming from a self-conscious AI's psychological experience. But then it would probably be utterly incomprehensible for us : ) "If a lion could speak, we could not understand him", as the philosopher remarked.

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#195

Post by Shocka1 »

thorum wrote: post #37
snek_case wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to say because even a model like GPT-3 is limited in its ability to generate a textual story that remains coherent over time. When you're talking about generating video, you need to have lots of story and visual details remaining coherent over a very long time horizon. Generally speaking, I think this is an area where deep neural networks are fairly weak and symbolic AI shines. It's much easier to program a…

I suspect the solution to keeping a long story coherent is using the model at different levels of abstraction. A human writer doesn’t sit down and write a complete novel in one sitting. They go through a process of planning, character development, world building and so on. When they write a scene, they’re not holding every detail about the rest of the book in their mind, they’re narrowing down to the details that mat…

Yup, this makes a lot of sense to me. I could even see models broken down by director/film. So many combinations could be used - the possibilities are endless. A Tarantino model like that of Pulp Fiction might be a good one.

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#196

Post by sitkack »

Melting_Harps wrote: post #185
sitkack wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are using ML and the pointy end of capitalism to create traps for the human mind (at scale). This is dangerous.

> We are using ML and the pointy end of capitalism to create traps for the human mind (at scale). This is dangerous. That remains to be seen, if the extent of ML thus far can be measured by it most ubiquitous use case then it's only pitfall is making people worse spellers than they already were. Autocorrect is a form of ML that quite honestly displays the MANY shortcomings at something that has been around for what?…

> if the extent of ML thus far can be measured by it most ubiquitous use case then it's only pitfall is making people worse spellers than they already were

that is a ridiculous gaslight. ML makes people worse spellers, really?

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#197

Post by TuringTest »

nl wrote: post #123
TuringTest wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How likely is it this is essentially one or more comments from HN memorised by the neural net, with some synonym usage? How do we know that it’s not just reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author? Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. What's impressive in its own right is the fact that it can find sentences that are relevant and me…

> Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. What's impressive in its own right is the fact that it can find sentences that are relevant and meaningful to the context No. That's not how this works.

> No. That's not how this works.

Ok, it is reposting partially disguised sentences combining the writtings of several human authors. Better now?

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#198

Post by TuringTest »

jstummbillig wrote: post #115
TuringTest wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How likely is it this is essentially one or more comments from HN memorised by the neural net, with some synonym usage? How do we know that it’s not just reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author? Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. What's impressive in its own right is the fact that it can find sentences that are relevant and me…

> Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. Like any human would?

I like to believe that sometimes humans do reason about the utterances they emit, they do not just blindly repeat what they have heard without processing it.

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#199

Post by nl »

TuringTest wrote: post #197
nl wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Oh, we know for sure that it is reposting partially disguised sentences written by a human author. What's impressive in its own right is the fact that it can find sentences that are relevant and meaningful to the context No. That's not how this works.

> No. That's not how this works. Ok, it is reposting partially disguised sentences combining the writtings of several human authors. Better now?

No. That is NOT what it does at all.

Here's a quick explainable in this thread for what it does: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31489463

If you gave 100 well read, English speaking humans the following (very commonly found) sentence and asked them to predict the next character what would they do?

"four score and s"

Most would predict "e", then "v" etc until you get "seven". That's what a language model does.

So if you give it (or humans!) a prompt that is less common or has more variation:

"that is no" and ask for the most likely next character you will get a lot of variation from both humans and machines. The heat parameter in language models tune how random it will be. Both will produce English, because English words are more common than gibberish, but which works will be produced is randomish.

In neither case is it doing something that one would really characterise as "reposting partially disguised sentences combining the writtings of several human authors".

It is creating sentences that have never been seen before.

Re: I made an AI write a story about AI then I made another AI illustrate it

#200

Post by TuringTest »

nl wrote: post #199
TuringTest wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No. That's not how this works. Ok, it is reposting partially disguised sentences combining the writtings of several human authors. Better now?

No. That is NOT what it does at all. Here's a quick explainable in this thread for what it does: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31489463 If you gave 100 well read, English speaking humans the following (very commonly found) sentence and asked them to predict the next character what would they do? "four score and s" Most would predict "e", then "v" etc until you get "seven". That's what a language model does. So…

How do you calculate the "most likely character to appear next", if not by memorizing lots and lots of existing sentences? ML is by essence a copycat that will regurgitate what it has seen before in a new context, no matter how hard you try to hide it under the mathematical shape of the probabilities of single characters in a sequence.

Now, there is the philosophical question of whether human creators simply do the same. (Which the don't; we have other mental processes for creating ideas than predicting the next letter we are going to utter next). But that doesn't change the fact that the likeliness of each emitted word is determined by what the model has seen more often in relation to the current context and therefore it considers most "valid".

Post reply on HN