Some might say that the output of large language models doesn’t look all that different from a human writer’s first draft, but, again, I think this is a superficial resemblance. Your first draft isn’t an unoriginal idea expressed clearly; it’s an original idea expressed poorly, and it is accompanied by your amorphous dissatisfaction, your awareness of the distance between what it says and what you want it to say. That’s what directs you during rewriting, and that’s one of the things lacking when you start with text generated by an A.I.
There’s nothing magical or mystical about writing, but it involves more than placing an existing document on an unreliable photocopier and pressing the Print button.
I think our materialist culture forgets that minds exist. The output from writing something is not just “the thing you wrote”, but also your thoughts about the thing you wrote.
The dialog pushing AI media seems to start from this assumption that I consume media just to have colors and words and sounds enter my face holes. In fact, I consume art and media because I like hearing, seeing, and reading about how other humans experience the same world I do. It’s a form of communication. I like the product but also the process of people trying to capture the bonkers, ineffable experience we all seem to be sharing in ways I would never think of, but can instantly verify.
What’s funny is, due to the nature of media, it’s kind of impossible to not communicate something, even if the artwork itself is empty. When I see AI media I see the communication of a mind that doesn’t know or give a shit about any of this. So in their attempt make filler they are in fact making art about how inarticulate they are. It’s unintentional, corporate dadaism.
Not even necessarily a human being! I’d appreciate the fuck out of art if any species made it. But there must be more than uncaring, unfeeling, probabilistic interpretation of input data.
The people pushing AI don’t like like hearing, seeing, and reading about how other humans experience the world. They actually do just want flashing colors and sounds poured into their face holes. They’re basically incapable of understanding art.
I like the way Ted Chiang puts it:
I think our materialist culture forgets that minds exist. The output from writing something is not just “the thing you wrote”, but also your thoughts about the thing you wrote.
The dialog pushing AI media seems to start from this assumption that I consume media just to have colors and words and sounds enter my face holes. In fact, I consume art and media because I like hearing, seeing, and reading about how other humans experience the same world I do. It’s a form of communication. I like the product but also the process of people trying to capture the bonkers, ineffable experience we all seem to be sharing in ways I would never think of, but can instantly verify.
What’s funny is, due to the nature of media, it’s kind of impossible to not communicate something, even if the artwork itself is empty. When I see AI media I see the communication of a mind that doesn’t know or give a shit about any of this. So in their attempt make filler they are in fact making art about how inarticulate they are. It’s unintentional, corporate dadaism.
Yes, this is it right here. The whole point of art is communication and connection with another human being.
Not even necessarily a human being! I’d appreciate the fuck out of art if any species made it. But there must be more than uncaring, unfeeling, probabilistic interpretation of input data.
Hell yeah, otherkin inclusive language
The people pushing AI don’t like like hearing, seeing, and reading about how other humans experience the world. They actually do just want flashing colors and sounds poured into their face holes. They’re basically incapable of understanding art.