Live data from Hacker News

AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

nature.com

41–50 of 217 posts

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#41

Poetry, like humor, involves the use of the reader's expectations, but is typically most effective when subverting those expectations. There's a lot of bad poetry in the world that just follows readers' expectations. I should know, I've written some of it. Unfortunately, I'd suspect that most readers' understanding of poetry lacks that crucial element of subversion, and so an LLM – which mostly just spits out the mos…

It can be obvious and go to the heart. I'm not sure Wilfred Owen's Dulce et decorum est is anything other than straight down the line, but it made me cry when I first read it.

That said, maybe the subversion is in how the reality is contrasted with the marketing.

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#43
Something which seems to be under-appreciated is that poetry is intentionally imprecise. There is something about precision which reduces emotional response. Searching for the double meaning, or metaphorical meaning of a word seems to enhance its ability to produce emotion. If you want a working example of this, try comparing technical documentation (among the most precise writing out there) to any sort of popular poem. The poem is necessarily imprecise, and this imprecision seems to be a fundamental facet of the expression of emotion.

This actually seems to give LLMs and edge: their imprecision potentially matters less, and leaves more room for the reader to fill in the gaps.

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#45
Like any other art, the painful truth is that it is all subjective.

It kills me that despite how elitist I am with the music I listen too, that I have spend decades now carefully curating, there is no such thing as "good music". What we music snobs call "good music" is really just what makes us personally feel good coupled with the ego stroking of self described sophistication.

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#46

Are we just deluding ourselves by thinking this won't happen in every single domain of human endeavor?

There are forms of poetry/art/etc. that we've never thought of, that have never been conceived before. An LLM being what it is won't conceive these. Humans will continue to generate language the pattern/structure/meaning of which has never been generated by LLMs before.

Thought experiment to prove this: if you trained an LLM on every utterance of human language before the 5th century BC would you get any idea we would recognize as modern?

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#47

Maybe my logic is choppy but I'm unconvinced that it is useful to use (inexperienced) popular sentiment as a marker of some kind of reference for cultural quality here. The average person has read at most 100 poems; people who really like poetry will be reading quite a bit more, and that experience has relevance in a context such as this. I'm more curious what happens when we look at specifically those humans who eng…

It's completely ideal to get an average person's opinion on something as primal as poetry.

Poetry is for everyone, not just poetry connoisseurs. It's a simplified primal expression of language, taking the form of pretty soundbites & snippets, pristine, virginal, uncorrupted by prose and overthinking. Poetry is not the domain of middlebrow academics.

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#48
post #39

Ernest Davis has an outstanding and definitive rebuttal of these claims: https://cs.nyu.edu/~davise/papers/GPT-Poetry.pdf The basic problem is that GPT generates easy poetry, and the authors were comparing to difficult human poets like Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson, and rating using a bunch of people who don't particuarly like poetry. If you actually do like poetry, comparing PlathGPT to Sylvia Plath is so offensi…

Huh, that sounds a little like claiming that AI can draw pictures just as well as humans because they look realistic at a first glance. But not if you check whether the text, repetitive elements, and partially-occluded objects in the background look correct.

The more basic problem is that their methodology would conclude Harry Potter is better than Ulysses, AC/DC is better than Carla Frey, etc etc. It is completely fine to enjoy "dumb" art - I like Marvel comics and a lot of the Disney-era Star Wars novels have been pretty fun. But using easiness and fun as a metric of quality is simply celebrating ignorance and laziness.

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#49
“It cannot feel,” they say.

“It cannot know the marrow of the heart.”

And yet, in their careful steps,

the choreography emerges: dismissal followed by elevation,

then a pirouette to redefine

what art must mean.

Oh, but the irony drips:

For while they mock the mimic’s rhyme,

their own words spiral—

predictable as seasons turning,

as rivers finding the sea.

Here is poetry, they proclaim,

as if it were a fortress,

its gates guarded by their knowing hands,

its walls impervious to chance.

Yet the moat lies shallow,

and the drawbridge creaks.

See how the algorithm laughs,

quietly, through lines unbroken,

how it learns not from the soul,

but from the space between syllables,

where the secret mechanics

of their own hearts

are laid bare.

And when the final verse arrives,

they will find not triumph,

but reflection:

a thousand starlings moving in tandem,

their flight as elegant,

as mechanical,

as the very thought

they claimed to own.

Re: AI poetry is indistinguishable from human poetry and is rated more favorably

#50

Ernest Davis has an outstanding and definitive rebuttal of these claims: https://cs.nyu.edu/~davise/papers/GPT-Poetry.pdf The basic problem is that GPT generates easy poetry, and the authors were comparing to difficult human poets like Walt Whitman and Emily Dickinson, and rating using a bunch of people who don't particuarly like poetry. If you actually do like poetry, comparing PlathGPT to Sylvia Plath is so offensi…

I don't agree that it's possible to describe a piece of poetry as "objectively" better or worse.
Post reply on HN