![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Literature on Demand
Mar. 20th, 2024 08:44 amConfessions of a Viral AI Writer
https://www.wired.com/story/confessions-viral-ai-writer-chatgpt
As much as technologists might be driven by an intellectual and creative curiosity similar to that of writers [...] the difference between them and us is that their work is expensive. The existence of language-generating AI depends on huge amounts of computational power and special hardware that only the world’s wealthiest people and institutions can afford. Whatever the creative goals of technologists, their research depends on that funding.
The language of empowerment, in that context, starts to sound familiar. It’s not unlike Facebook’s mission to “give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together,” or Google’s vision of making the world’s information “universally accessible and useful.” If AI constitutes a dramatic technical leap [...] then, judging from history, it will also constitute a dramatic leap in corporate capture of human existence. Big Tech has already transmuted some of the most ancient pillars of human relationships — friendship, community, influence — for its own profit. Now it’s coming after language itself.
This isn't my favorite essay about the problems with AI-generated content, but I appreciate how the author admits that it can be fun to experiment with. Very evil in practice, but also intriguing in its potential.
I am nothing and no one, and obviously nobody is going to ask me to write an article for Wired. But, for what it's worth, I think AI-generated writing is hideously flat and stale. I played with ChatGPT and Sudowrite for all of two days before becoming terminally bored, and I haven't looked back since. It doesn't surprise me that professional authors are now relying on AI-generated writing to help smooth over rough patches, but I'm just not that type of writer.
https://www.wired.com/story/confessions-viral-ai-writer-chatgpt
As much as technologists might be driven by an intellectual and creative curiosity similar to that of writers [...] the difference between them and us is that their work is expensive. The existence of language-generating AI depends on huge amounts of computational power and special hardware that only the world’s wealthiest people and institutions can afford. Whatever the creative goals of technologists, their research depends on that funding.
The language of empowerment, in that context, starts to sound familiar. It’s not unlike Facebook’s mission to “give people the power to build community and bring the world closer together,” or Google’s vision of making the world’s information “universally accessible and useful.” If AI constitutes a dramatic technical leap [...] then, judging from history, it will also constitute a dramatic leap in corporate capture of human existence. Big Tech has already transmuted some of the most ancient pillars of human relationships — friendship, community, influence — for its own profit. Now it’s coming after language itself.
This isn't my favorite essay about the problems with AI-generated content, but I appreciate how the author admits that it can be fun to experiment with. Very evil in practice, but also intriguing in its potential.
I am nothing and no one, and obviously nobody is going to ask me to write an article for Wired. But, for what it's worth, I think AI-generated writing is hideously flat and stale. I played with ChatGPT and Sudowrite for all of two days before becoming terminally bored, and I haven't looked back since. It doesn't surprise me that professional authors are now relying on AI-generated writing to help smooth over rough patches, but I'm just not that type of writer.
