[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 115 KB, 1024x1024, 1509916785947.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13401451 No.13401451 [Reply] [Original]

When AI have perfected the art of writing, will human-written books become obsolete?

>> No.13401464

>>13401451
Are you the one in the wheelchair?

>> No.13401471

>>13401464
Yes, op is in the wheelchair and I'm his dad.

>> No.13401487

>>13401471
Then who is the doctor?

>> No.13401508

>>13401487
my fren

>> No.13401557

>>13401451
>yep, that's a wheelchair

>> No.13401623

>>13401451
Yes. Fuck humans.

>> No.13401677

me on the right, on the left, and the center

>> No.13401883

That's not how AI works you fucking tard. :33

>> No.13401937
File: 289 KB, 720x405, lead_720_405.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13401937

AI generated stories might be hip for a hot minute, but people will probably get tired of them and prefer human made.

But (if we survive into the self-evolutionary period) we'll eventually blend ourselves into "artificial" beings and what kind of authors we like then, if any kind, we wont know.

AI and advance robotics are just automatons, slave labor. They'll do the work we don't want to do. They may play music, recite poetry, act more often then create

>> No.13403359

>>13401883
>>13401937
So what is the difference between humans and AI? What if we were to create AI that dwarfed human intelligence and emotional experiences?

>> No.13403398

>>13401487
me, It's not looking good

>> No.13403406

>>13401451

It's likely AI won't be used for creative work because modelling creativity is extremely hard.
But writing AI will probably be a reality for technical work like writing scientific work given some inputs, or writing a news story, or other such technical work. That'll be done by machines in 100~200 years time.
Journalist, editors and shit like this will all lose their jobs or be repurposed.

>> No.13403407

>>13401451
>>13403359
>When AI have perfected the art of writing
AI only can learn to write through matching what humans have written, that is the essential part of how machine learning works.
The biggest problem is that what is "good" can't really be judged by a machine, which makes training for "good" books pretty hard and even then, the AI will most likely not be able to be "inventive" in any meaningful way.

>What if we were to create AI that dwarfed human intelligence and emotional experiences?
The most essential property of human intelligence is that it is general and can adapt to an enormous variety of tasks.
Training an AI to beat humans at a specific task is usually not enormously hard, meaning achievable, see chess or go as examples (but there are cases where AI simply is not even comparable to humans, e.g. proving mathematical theorems).
But fundamentally, all AI we have can't transfer knowledge, bridging that gap is the hardest thing in AI research, and it is far beyond our reaches.

>> No.13403422

>>13403407
The limitations of AI you listed are also applicable to humans.

>> No.13403433

>>13403422
No, try reading again.

>> No.13403450

This next post was written by the AI at https://talktotransformer.com/

"AI will never learn how to write literary fiction. Nor should they be allowed to write one without some degree of sophistication or experience. For such a job, they need to show themselves capable of producing a quality and engaging experience that matches a standard, if not higher standard than they have come up with. While no writer ever wants their work to go under, the most effective writers can get out of the way of that goal by making their projects work well and by working effectively on the task before them.

The next most common response is to say "yes." One of the primary advantages to writing a novel is that it is much easier than a play about a novel, and there is no set of rules to guide you. (It's not just a matter of writing a lot of little things; what you should be doing is building on your skills so you can produce great stories.) This sort of reaction can be frustrating. One way to counter this is to say, "There are many genres out there with different rules to follow: what about you? What are you going to do to follow the rules?""

>> No.13403453

People who doubt the ability of ai are truly stupid, among the ranks of believers in free will, climate change deniers, communists, anarchists and people who believe in a “human spirit”.

>> No.13403544

>>13403453
>who doubt the ability of ai
What do you mean by that. Currently GAI is very far from reality.

>and people who believe in a “human spirit”
To me it seems pretty much confirmed that our brains are more than classical computers, they seems very much less deterministic, but seem to outclass AI by enormous factors in very broad ranges of abilities.

>> No.13404452

>>13403544
Purely because these developments have been necessary for human life. A supercomputer is constructed for a very specific reason.

>> No.13404469

>>13403398
I'm the guy in the painting.
I'm thinking
"It's bursitis! Knee bursitis!"

>> No.13404487

>>13403453
>everyone except my super special brand of secular spiritual capitalism
Heheh. Weirdo. I think AI can develop all the way to being comparably human, I just don’t know what circumstances we’d want to make them. I do wonder. But crapitalism will see us die out if we don’t stop it

>> No.13404521

>>13401451
αἴkα

>> No.13404551

>>13401451
Why can’t he walk?

>> No.13404558

>>13401451
Yes, because humans will become obsolete

>> No.13404562

>>13403406
I hope you're not past your 40s so you see how wrong you are.

>> No.13404564

>>13404551
He tired

>> No.13404572

>>13401451
Goes a lot further than art and literature. All human endeavor is on the verge of becoming obsolete.

>> No.13404588

>>13404551
too stupid to figure out how to move his legs

>> No.13404594
File: 48 KB, 1024x962, 1545340144886.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13404594

>>13404588

>> No.13404642

>>13404594
sorry fren :(

>> No.13404647

>>13403450
Most AI writing I've seen is like that. Decent newspaper report that slowly veer into not-quite-sense or not-quite-nonsense depending on the topic. Rather startling and funny to read, I wonder how much this will be a topic of study in 100 years.

>> No.13404851

Definitely not
There is no mastery and perfection in writing.
how we are going to define perfect in wrting and other art forms.answer is we cannot
also humans make art for other humans.
if writing becomes too ''qualified'' how can we understand it? so it becames meaningless

>> No.13405606

>>13401937
This is a stupid post.

Cyborgs are not becoming a fucking reality.

Jesus fucking Christ you tards. Artificial intelligence will never generate entertainment.

>> No.13405687

>>13403407
Best post. AI can only ever be as good as the requirements humans give it--for example, evolutionary models can only ever be designed to maximize a designated utility function. The problem is that humans can't write a list of rules for what's good. Try to formalize in any sort of technical way what makes Dubliners good, or the Iliad, or Faust. You'll fail. Machines (objects) can optimize given constraints, but deciding upon values can only be done by humans (subjects).

>> No.13407090

>>13405606
>Artificial intelligence will never generate entertainment.
t. never played a rogue like

>> No.13407935
File: 873 KB, 260x146, 88F7A9FE-09C4-402C-B6E8-AD42777D4216.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13407935

>>13405606
Yeah, they are. Now.
Machines already entertain us even. I donno what level of creativity they can deliver, but a reasonable facsimile is no doubt quite possible