It's not AI slop you hate
writing.sidharthkakkar.com
It's not AI slop you hate
1–4 of 4 posts
Re: It's not AI slop you hate
#2Everyone says they hate AI slop. The research says they can't actually tell it apart. So what's going on?
Re: It's not AI slop you hate
#3>Porter and Machery found that people were more likely to call AI poems human, than they were to call human poems human
poetry is an outlier because most human poetry is meaningless pretentious dogshit that even GPT-3.5 could easily excel at generating. it's regular prose where their uncanny valley tone is immediately apparent to anyone who's been dealing with them for a while. all models are being trained to be bland, inoffensive sycophants, and you can't defeat their nature even with a 50k token system prompt.
Re: It's not AI slop you hate
#4>Porter and Machery found that people were more likely to call AI poems human, than they were to call human poems human poetry is an outlier because most human poetry is meaningless pretentious dogshit that even GPT-3.5 could easily excel at generating. it's regular prose where their uncanny valley tone is immediately apparent to anyone who's been dealing with them for a while. all models are being trained to be blan…
Hm, I get not being into Poetry, but a large portion of humanity is into it, so it's a particularly aggressive form of hubris to decide they are all dogshit lovers.
But I'll take your point that poetry is different than regular prose. And I agree that even GPT-3.5 excelled at generating it.
I do think you can get a model to generate spicy, somewhat offensive/edgy content, but even then it doesn't sound like a real person. So I think bland/inoffensive isn't enough of an explanation.