> Despite this success, evidence about non-experts’ ability to distinguish AI-generated poetry has been mixed. Non-experts in poetry may use different cues, and be less familiar with the structural requirements of rhyme and meter, than experts in poetry or poetry generation. Gunser and colleagues14 and Rahmeh15 find that human-written poems are evaluated more positively than AI-generated poems. Köbis and Mossink16 finds that when a human chooses the best AI-generated poem (“human-in-the-loop”) participants cannot distinguish AI-generated poems from human-written poems, but when an AI-generated poem is chosen at random (“human-out-of-the-loop”), participants are able to distinguish AI-generated from human-written poems.
This is a huge difference. Writing is a two-step process: idea generation, and selection. The first part is similar to what a randomized algorithm or an LLM might do, in smaller chunks (and indeed, the history of aleatoric processes in creative endeavors is long -- see Oulipo for one example in literature.)
The second step -- selection -- is the heart of creativity. It's about taste. Knowing what is and isn't "good."
When you consider the creative processes of Dada, Duchamp, Brian Eno -- I think it becomes clear that this automation of creative generation is a continuation of existing trends rather than a sudden disruption.
If an LLM were able to, on its own, generate and select poems, independently developing a new style of poetry that resonated with readers -- that would be something else entirely.
The comment above seems too dismissive in my opinion.
There is a lot of (credible and rational) (thinking and research) around what AGI might entail. There are also many interesting theories about consciousness that are worth considering. However, I don’t buy panpsychism nor notions of an “earth spirit”. Materialism works, best I can tell, and I’m not ready to throw it out. / I’m just asking for GP to explain.
A Large Language Model + A Large Earth-data Model merged into one. Like an image model mixed with a language model. It just needs a way to understand the pattern of Life like they appear to condense the patterns of language and thought.
I saw that and I thought it was kind of interesting since that suggests they're doing local inference. Funnily enough, it requires an internet connection, and stores as much information as they can process remotely according to their FAQ.
I feel like I'm in the target demographic for something like this. I want my phone to be worse. I don't want to look at my phone as much as I do. The fact that I can't use this without a phone makes it a non-starter for me.
