This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I mean this just isn’t true. Current models are good at writing. Are they as good as the best human writers? Not yet, but they aren’t far away and things like context windows or workarounds for them are going to be solved pretty quickly. Current AI art (ie the new multimodal OpenAI model) is, in terms of technical ability, as good as the best human artists working in digital art as a medium. You and I might agree that feeding family pictures into them to “make it like a studio ghibli movie” is indeed slop-inducing, but that’s just a matter of bad taste on the part of the prompter. The same is true for music.
To say that current gen generative AI isn’t good at writing / art / music you essentially have to redefine those things in what amounts to a tautology. Sure, if you only like listening to music that reflects the deep, real human emotion of its creator then you won’t like listening to AI music that you know is created by AI, but if you’re tricked you’ll have no idea. An autobiography that turns out to be made up is a bad autobiography, but it’s not bad writing.
The rest of your argument is just generic god of the gaps stuff, except lacking the quality and historical backing of a good religious apologia. Three years ago language models could barely string together a coherent sentence and online digital artists who work on commission were laughing over image models that created only bizarre abstract shape art. They’re not laughing now.
Oh, oh, I get it, you would prefer people tried the style of Osamu Tezuka, how very patrician of you.
More options
Context Copy link
I don't think we are going to see eye to eye on this at all because I don't think current AI models are good at writing. There is no flow, there is no linking together of ideas, and the understanding of the topics covered is superficial at best. Maybe this is the standard for writing now, but I don't think you can say this is good.
I challenge you to post two examples of writing you find good in a reply below, one from AI, and one from a human. I bet you I will be able to tell which is which, and I also guess that I will find neither good nor compelling.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link