/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21958675]

AI is on the verge of writing entire cohesive novels in seconds, tailored exactly to your tastes. Will this be the end of the publishing industry?

I personally guess that most of the industry will die. A handful of micropublishers will exist for enthusiasts who do not like AI, but that will be it.

[Anonymous No.21958689]

>>21958675
You’re a retard, OP. The only people worried and impressed by AI writing are retards. The people who talk about the future of publishing vis-a-vis AI writing exclusively read schlock and will continue to read schlock. Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.21958698]

>>21958689
>exclusively read schlock and will continue to read schlock
That's most people who read. The industry cannot live without them.

[Anonymous No.21958699]

>>21958675
aesthetic vs art

[Anonymous No.21958723]

>>21958698
Who gives a fuck about the literature 'industry' lmfao
Honestly I'm excited for real AI (not Chatgpt you retards) putting huge swathes of useless faggots out of a job.

[Anonymous No.21958732]

>Borges' Library of Babel will become real in our lifetime

[Anonymous No.21958740]

>>21958699
Nobody reads aesthetic lit. Women are 90% of the market and I implore you to pay attention to what books they are reading. Not a single care for aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.21958742]

>>21958675
Who cares? Human creativity is exhausted anyway, with or without AI. And literally nobody will read when AI will design your own personal Matrix with responsive NPCs and countless generated stories in whatever kind of world you like, fantasy, scifi, ancient history etc etc.

[Anonymous No.21958745]

>>21958675
What's most impressive is that they were able to do all this with a single NVDA GTX1080Ti GPU. I'm so excited for the future bros.

[Anonymous No.21958749]

>>21958740
I do not give a fuck what mediocre women read. There are enough highbrow books in existence for me to read and still have left unread by the time I die. Fuck off, loser.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21958759]

I want ai writing to be really good, memory isn’t the problem, it just doesn’t have the technical detail that I read for yet, I hope one day it gets there.

[Anonymous No.21958763]

>>21958759
You read schlock anyways, gyp. AI as it is, is perfect for you and perfectly captures your writing style

[Anonymous No.21958765]

>>21958675
I have faith that AI will one day be a god among men in every intellectual category. But at the moment it can barely write me a program to solve Block the Pig puzzles

[Anonymous No.21958795]

>>21958675
The end? No, not for a while, at least. It's definitely a real and growing danger, though, as there's tons of people trying to submit AI work and sites are having to put up disclaimers against it. The danger will be when they can no longer tell the difference. On the art side of things, successful video game companies are already getting away with using AI generated art for promotional material rather than hire actual artists.

>>21958742
This is truth. Look at how people are already shunning humanity with the evolution of technology. Once virtual reality is perfected, it'll be the ultimate escapism. It's going to need to come with a hefty subscription price to keep people wage slaving.

[Anonymous No.21958850]

>>21958795
>to keep people wage slaving.
Why wouldn't you just wage slave inside the VR?

[Anonymous No.21958853]

>>21958675
The greatest masterpieces of literature are also masterpieces of subtlety and allusion, with such undercurrents running underneath throughout hundreds of pages of the work. Could a computer create something like this? Probably not anytime soon. Generating a 2 minute pop song or rendering a photo isn’t nearly as complex as task.

[Anonymous No.21958861]

>>21958749
I'm 29, have read 500 books or so, and I am running out of obviously good stuff.

[Anonymous No.21958871]

>>21958861
That’s sad. I am 30 and have read over 1,000 books of literary fiction, poetry, and plays and still have too much to read. This is excluding philosophy and theology.

[Anonymous No.21958875]

>>21958675
Good. The publishing industry is absolute cancer and deserves no less than an excruciating slide into bankruptcy.
Maybe then the small cafe circles of self published novelists will gain traction and something worth while will find its way into circulation.
>inb4 my diary desu
My diary first, fags.

[Anonymous No.21958884]

Imagine someone saying "oh no, poor Hollywood! Who will watch Disney remakes now?!"

That's how I feel about the publishing industry dying. Good riddance.

[Anonymous No.21958885]

>>21958853
I mean there are other models which have theoretically infinite context. Even this model scales linearly with number of tokens, so in theory, with enough GPUs you could build a model (today even) that takes in tens of millions of tokens as context, basically the equivalent of the sum total of all the books that one of your master authors would have read, and have it write a novel that makes allusions to stuff within that context.

[Anonymous No.21958889]

I doubt it.

AI writing lacks soul.

[Anonymous No.21958902]

>this thread
either you guys all fell for the AI shilling since the last time i visited this board, or you finally decided to stop being luddites. either way, a nice change.

[Anonymous No.21958903]

>>21958885
>sum total of all the books that one of your master authors would have read
Do you really believe good literature comes about by remixing all the stuff you read? Any decent reader/critic can tell when an author has nothing to say and just imitates his favorite writing

[Anonymous No.21958908]

>>21958871
Hit me up with your best recs then. ,

[Anonymous No.21958909]

>>21958861
Time to learn a second language.

[Anonymous No.21958919]

>>21958689
>>21958723
These posts sound dumber than the average ChatGPT posts

[Anonymous No.21958924]

>>21958919
>These posts sound dumber than the average ChatGPT posts

[Anonymous No.21958927]

>>21958909
I read six.
Well, 3, because scandi languages are interchangable.

[Anonymous No.21958930]

>>21958903
Yeah, pretty much. And I think all the great authors you admire would also agree. Books are made out of other books. What an AI would lack would be the specific perspective of the individual author, but interestingly, you might be able to achieve that by fine-tuning on say, your own work (literally my diary desu).

[Anonymous No.21958935]

>>21958930
Retard

[Anonymous No.21958937]

>>21958885
The model would need a whole bunch of examples to work off of, yes, but there probably aren’t (at least in computational terms) that many master works to feed to the model as examples.

To expand on the point I was making: part of the issue with literature, at least in comparison to music and visual art, is that so much of its message is missing from the medium. That is to say, a book’s story can impart as much by what it doesn’t say as by what it does. (Literary masters are also masters of subtlety.) In music and visual art the elements of the work are much more present a measurable way, which in turn makes them easier to replicate.

[Anonymous No.21958947]

>>21958908

[Anonymous No.21958955]

>>21958935
You think what I wrote is retarded because you can't admit to yourself that all your favorite authors are just a mixture of their own personal experiences with whatever authors they happened to have been reading while they were composing their works. Take Moby Dick for example. It's quite clear what books and experiences influenced Melville by just taking a gander at his biography and his personal library. Even his style is an aping of the works he read and studied. The only thing that's retarded is this undying belief in human exceptionalism.

[Anonymous No.21958964]

>>21958955
Retard.

[Anonymous No.21958978]

>>21958937
Ah I see. I misunderstood your original post. Subtlety is an interesting point because I do think it's possible for an AI produced work to be subtle, but unintentionally. I.e the reader can read into the text more than what the author intended. An AI, of course, cannot really intend anything. It's basically the Chinese Room Problem. But I do think AI can eventually (and probably sooner than you think, maybe even today) pass a literary Turing test, if only because of the human tendency to find hidden meaning and allusion in everything.

[Anonymous No.21958995]

>>21958689
But anon I'm hack who can only write schlock.

[Anonymous No.21959135]

>>21958675
>AI is on the verge of writing entire cohesive novels in seconds, tailored exactly to your tastes.
No, it can't.
The data set simply is trash and literature requires some actual comprehension. An artist can fix those crooked fingers and warped faces, but you cannot polish a turd of a story.

[Anonymous No.21959138]

>>21959135
Humanist cope

[Anonymous No.21959143]

>>21958742
>Human creativity is exhausted anyway
You need to leave your bubble.

[Anonymous No.21959154]

>>21958675

[Anonymous No.21959155]

>>21958978
Thinking about it, it’s probably more likely that a high quality work produced by an AI would be one that’s heavily directed by a human rather than created entirely independent of human input. This way, the human could design certain elements of the story while allowing the computer to do the rote work of writing passages. I would think that a weak point of AI would be literary innovation (since it only creates based on data fed to its model), but with a human working in conjunction with the AI you could probably produce something quite good.

[Anonymous No.21959164]

>>21959154

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959168]

>>21958763
Nah, things incapable of any of the metrical, alliterative or rhyme stuff I want and isn’t capable of replicating the kind of linguistic control of even someone like Walter Scott. If You can’t tell the difference Das on you.

[Anonymous No.21959171]

>>21959143
Moron

[Anonymous No.21959176]

>>21959164
These AIs are not creative and don’t understand words the correct way. It will never be able to write a good novel but it could write a serial tv show like a Jew can where it checks the boxes and has shock value and twists and diversity.

[Anonymous No.21959179]

>>21959168
>metrical, alliterative or rhyme stuf
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA gpt4 can do just that unprompted. This gyp cope is hilarious. Keep pretending you are the long lost member of jedi mind tricks

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959191]

>>21959179
Never was a fan of them. But sure ask gpt 4 to write you four stanzas rhyming the final three syllables of every line, while maintaining a perfect dactylic hexameter while alliterating 3 consonants in each line, that’s a very simple task. Go ahead and show me and see if it will produce that meter with no errors.

[Anonymous No.21959199]

>>21959191
Bud, you can't even do that. Good job googling dactylic hexameter. I bet your dad is proud of his gypigger son

[Anonymous No.21959209]

>>21959191
It's attempt:

In caverns cold, where creatures creep, a castle's crumbling keep,
With wailing winds, the world's wild woes, weave wistful weeping deep.
From farthest fields, where fairies flit, and fallen feathers sleep,
These dreams descend, while dusk's dark dance, in drowsy danger seeps.

Through tangled trees, where twilight treads, and tempests tear the sky,
As mountains mourn, the misty moats, where myrtle meadows lie.
With silvered stars, their secrets sung, and silent serenades,
In endless eons ever etched, and echoes' eerie shades.

Beyond the boughs, where bright birds break, the brittle blackened night,
The velvet veil, a vision's vane, where vibrant visions alight.
With shattered shards, the shadows shun, and shivering shrouds release,
From gilded gleams, and golden grains, that grace the ghostly geese.

As shadows shift, the sun shall sing, and seize the sapphire skies,
And waken worlds, where whispers wane, and wistful wishes rise.
In dawn's delight, the day descends, and dreams do drift away,
As echoes end, and eons ebb, in eternity's embrace.

[Anonymous No.21959225]

>>21959209
So, it’s garbage. But then again so is most contemporary poetry written by people.

[Anonymous No.21959228]

>>21959225
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.21959233]

>>21958675
I think you can draw an analogy with this to how Onlyfans is affecting the porn industry. I'm sure they're not making as much money as before but there is an established, for lack of a better word, prestige and automatic audience that comes with going to a manufacturer (or publisher). Also, isn't part of the draw of Onlyfans is that people can interact with the content producers? You can't interact empathetically with AI the same way as you can an author (even one who is long dead).

Apologies for the base analogy. It's the best of analog to disruption that I could come up with (i.e. established industry experincing shift due to technological shift that also involves personal contact, or at least the illusion of such). I swear I'm not a coomer.

[Anonymous No.21959240]

>>21959233
>analogy
>analog
ANAL?!

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959308]

>>21959199
Making the meter have melody, consonance, music and energy,
isn’t that masterful rather a measly thing using your memory,
but with a bounty of beauties so cleverly crafted and tenderly
built with the brain in a burst I can bring you abundant this treasury,

gently cut gems such as jade or to cut them as grass in some garden grove,
gaiety granting me gorgeously glamours like skillfully carven stone,
giving thee groans for your grime is so great that you cry in your darkened home,
clamor and clangor your chattering anger i scattered by sharpened tones.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959315]

>>21959199
see
>>21959308

[Anonymous No.21959320]

>>21959308
Needs a good beat

[Anonymous No.21959325]

>>21959308
topkek

[Anonymous No.21959336]

>>21958675
I mean just learn a new language and move to the third world where no one can afford ai

[Anonymous No.21959341]

you cannot just generate a great novel without critical thinking

[Anonymous No.21959342]

>>21959225
What's garbage about that? It's actually surprisingly good and if it was a song in some fantasy book everyone would coom their pants about it. You seem like a common luddite pseud. Name 5 favorite poems to gauge whether you even have any taste

[Anonymous No.21959349]

>>21958675
if its good i'll read it, doesn't matter if its ai or human, same with art

[Anonymous No.21959352]

>>21958675
if I knew how to read this would be great news.

[Anonymous No.21959358]

>>21959308
Fuck off Unrealcuck
https://boards.4channel.org/lit/thread/21956468#bottom

[Anonymous No.21959359]

>>21959209
generating poetry is probably the most suitable task for AI because let's be honest almost everything passes and people will cum in their pants when they see it rhymes, all I can see are some repeating patterns

[Anonymous No.21959373]

this thread is pure consumerism, you only care about the readers, not the writers
only I can write the book I want to write and no AI will ever be a true copy of me - and even we both write the same thing, it's not really the same (see Borges's stories)
if you write for the reader's sake, you're a craftsman, not an artist and you're creating a product, not a work of art - craftsmen get replaced all the time by machines while artists will never be

[Anonymous No.21959374]

>>21959359
That's literally all what fratercuck asked it to do, bud

[Anonymous No.21959376]

>>21959374
I know, I am just saying it's not the best example to show how good the chatgpt is

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959404]

>>21959209
This is iambs not Dactyls


In CAV-erns COLD, where CREAT-ures CREEP, a CAST-le CRUMB-ling KEEP,
With WAILING winds, the WORLDS wild WOES weave WIST-ful WEEP-ing DEEP

notice how it neither has the right meter, nor the rhyme scheme.

DACT-yls are WRITT-en By STRESS-ing the FIRST and then FOLL-ow-ing THAT with a PYRRH-ric sound

Three syllable rhymes are exactly what they sound like.

En-er-gee
Mem-er-ree
Tend-er-lee
Tresh-er-ree

So yeah, utter failure.

[Anonymous No.21959418]

>>21959359
AI is unironically already better than 99.99% of human "poets"

[Anonymous No.21959419]

AGI is coming in less than 5 years.
You don't have much time left.

[Anonymous No.21959427]

>>21958964
kek, based

>>21958955
Retard.

[Anonymous No.21959436]

>>21959418
No, it isn't, and I think contemporary poetry is shit. I can't believe I'm watching you zoomer fucks actually cheerleading the creation of content so soulless and derivative it isn't even made by humans. Because it's the New Thing and your masters said you have to talk about it

[Anonymous No.21959442]

>>21959418
lmao

[Anonymous No.21959446]

>>21959436
>cheerleading the creation of content so soulless and derivative
Captures contemporary poetry perfectly. Thanks, m8

[Anonymous No.21959447]

>>21958889
I'm with you anon. Even if the publishing industry does go under--which I'd be sorry to see--real literature is, as DFW said; "an act of communication between one human being and another."

[Anonymous No.21959449]

>>21959418

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959452]

>>21959418
Only if you count the people who don’t even really try, who don’t really study and practice imo. Like sure it’s better than your kaurs no doubt, but I’m sure any anon here who puts in the effort can surpass it easy enough.

Rather let’s be hopeful that one day it’ll actually put us all in our place and show us a cold calculatory masterpiece that blows us all the fuck out, we should be happy to see it, not settle for the first shadow of that.

[Anonymous No.21959467]

>>21959446
Contemporary poetry is wordy, self-indulgent, and oblique at its worst, but it isn't technically soulless. Anyways fuck off you tasteless cumstain, you're just the last echo of those faggy cyberspace hippies who thought desktop computers were gonna catapult us into the future. Fag

[Anonymous No.21959471]

>>21959467
>Contemporary poetry is wordy,
not at all. read rupi Kaur.

[Anonymous No.21959479]

>>21959467
>wordy, self-indulgent, and oblique
>oblique
>but it isn't technically soulless

[Anonymous No.21959483]

>>21959479
Like pulling teeth with you tismos. Something can be self-indulgent and oblique but you can still tell it was made by a person who was feeling something. Nobody will accuse le pretentious French film of being "soulless", as in having a mechanical, ahuman quality. Fag

>>21959471
Lmao I'm talking about actual poetry published by psychological adults you goof

[Anonymous No.21959486]

>>21959483
>I'm talking about actual poetry published by psychological adults you goof
>wordy, self-indulgent, and oblique
>psychological adults writing wordy, self-indulgent, and oblique poetry
>oblique

[Anonymous No.21959487]

>>21959467
>Contemporary poetry is wordy, self-indulgent, and oblique at its worst
Is it though? Simon Armitage? Carol Ann Duffy? Michael Longley? A thousand flowers are blooming

[Anonymous No.21959492]

>>21959471
is rupi kaur the majority of all published poetry or what are you trying to say?

[Anonymous No.21959495]

>>21959487
At its worst.

[Anonymous No.21959496]

>>21958675
why read books when pretty soon we will just be able to download stuff into our brain.
and actually that will be pointless we will just be able to inject the appropriate chemicals directly into our receptors

[Anonymous No.21959503]

>>21959486
There are intelligent men and women that I'd respect if I ever met them who also happen to write stupid shit that I don't care to read, and not because I'm better than them but because our temperaments couldn't be more different. It's not like they're losing sleep over it in any case. But I'll take them over GPT slop any day

[Anonymous No.21959504]

>>21959483
>poetry must be about FEELINGS and SENTIMENTS
Ok female

[Anonymous No.21959515]

>>21959209
>its indistinguishable from Frater

[Anonymous No.21959517]

>>21959504
No, it's supposed to be about your stock portfolio. Isn't your lunch break over, fag?

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959528]

>>21959515
If you don’t actually know about technique and can’t see how it failed every challenge >>21959404

Then yeah, again, you’re not gonna be able to tell what it is that I’m complaining about, unless you’re telling me there’s no difference in the rhythm pattern nor the rhymes. If you cannot differentiate between the massive difference between an iamb and a dactyl, then the question of it getting better in terms of technique isn’t for you.

[Anonymous No.21959541]

>>21959492
the modern style in poetry is to use as few words as possible. same goes for prose. anything that is complex or baroque is a no-no because it's harder to sell.

[Anonymous No.21959592]

>>21959528
I don't care about the particular differences in meter in these two examples. The style, the tone, the language, are indistinguishable from the sort of poetry you consistently spam on this board, and if you posted the AI effort under your trip nobody would notice. Whether one is in iambs is irrelevant, its a question of creativity. Which is a bit more important

[Anonymous No.21959599]

>>21958675
AI doomers might be the single dumbest group of people on the Internet right now. There's no doubt that AI is going to significantly transform labor industries and utilitarian capacities around the world, but pretending like it's going to replace most forms of media and art is laughable. Video games and music will definitely be affected by AI since most people engage with them for personal enjoyment and nothing more. AI can set a foundation for concept art on many projects. But when it comes to narrative mediums like cinema and literature there is quite literally no benefit watching AI generated movies or reading AI generated books. Nobody is going to sit at home and watch personalized movies made by a robot rather than going to the theater to see the newest superhero film. Nobody would rather watch an AI sequel of Avatar than watch an actual Avatar sequel by James Cameron in IMAX. Likewise no one gives a fuck about reading AI books. AI romance books will never become more popular than Jane Austen. The whole appeal of narrative art is that it's communal and shared with the masses, narrative is a pillar of civilization itself and the role of the author can't be replaced by AI the way it can for music or video games. People want to experience ongoing stories and sagas created by humans, we're still not even sure if AI can ever capture the same creativity human minds use for storytelling anyways.

[Anonymous No.21959627]

>>21959599
Give it time. I thought AI was going to destroy work chores like dealing with excel files and all that boring shit. Instead they went straight to kill art. This is a conspiracy to kill the human soul and its ultimate expression. They know what they're doing.

[Anonymous No.21959628]

>>21959599
there are a lot of these doomers on 4chan too for some reason, just complete fucking crybabies who say AI destroying art is a good thing because the world is "woke" and sucks anyways so who cares about having powerful artists who can potentially make a difference. when the culture war lines are drawn, conservatives will be the ones who support AI in every sector just out of pure spite

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959631]

>>21959592
>I don't care about the particular differences in meter in these two examples.

Well I DO, that’s precisely my complaint and precisely where my care is, in the actual technical form.

>The style, the tone, the language, are indistinguishable from the sort of poetry you consistently spam on this board,

My style is in the manner of how its written, there’s none of the extreme assonance I attempt nor any of the entendre or the like, thus the language is very different. Again if you don’t care about the technique then the question doesn’t matter.

>and if you posted the AI effort under your trip nobody would notice.

And that would be on the reader for not being able to tell the difference when they’re absolutely glaring to anyone who cares about the art.

> Whether one is in iambs is irrelevant, its a question of creativity.


And where my concern with creativity is, you ignore and cannot tell the difference, that is a you problem. I won’t pretend to say I can tell you if the tone is similar, that’s down to your interpretation, but what isn’t down to interpretation is how I can break down the figures and modes and methods being employed and show how that’s the guts of my interest in writing, if the ai cannot do that, then to me is an utter failure for my desires.

I WANT an ai that can write better than me in my own style, I would love to read and study it, letting yourself be caught up in the most surface layer is doing yourself a disservice.

[Anonymous No.21959635]

>>21959631
>And that would be on the reader for not being able to tell the difference when they’re absolutely glaring to anyone who cares about the art
What you write will never be considered "art."

[Anonymous No.21959640]

>>21959599
Eventually you will read something written by AI that's better than anything human-written. You will be humbled by its depth, its understanding of the human condition, and the subtlety of the narrative. It will illuminate parts of your soul you were not aware of before. And it will have been created by a Chinese room made of silicon.

What that will say about biological intelligences will be left to the reader to contemplate.

[Frater Asemlen !XS8vrClKs2 No.21959645]

>>21959635
Even rupi kaur’s work is art, the question is whether to count a piece good art or bad, and on that question I agree with de Quincey, that the art that is made in accordance with the principles it was being written under, which obeys and expresses the ideal formal principles it intended, that work has to be counted w well done art piece. Regardless if another likes or dislikes the piece, the judge must be one’s formal principles.

[Anonymous No.21959647]

AI, a construction of man built upon a sea of quantity for the purpose of fulfilling our base pleasures and reducing man's experience into more datapoints, is the antichrist, destined to end the world.

[Anonymous No.21959650]

>>21959640
No I won't and I think you should consider suicide, unironically starting to believe that you AI shills on this website are being paid by OpenAI to shill

[Anonymous No.21959686]

>>21959650
>I think you should consider suicide
Not a chance friend. Far too excited about the new things on the horizon. They may be man-made horrors beyond comprehension to some, but there's a paradigm shift past them that will be astonishing to anyone who's strong enough to handle it.

[Anonymous No.21959729]

>>21959647
Rudolf Steiner said that in the final period before his incarnation, Ahriman would work through sympathetic humans, with souls hypertrophied in their technical-cleverness aspects, to create a body for himself. Ahriman, the demon of mere technical cleverness and "this-worldly" materiality, works both by convincing humans that they are mere material and by convincing them that material can think and have a soul, a double movement. Where this movement coincides, Ahriman will manifest on Earth, and permanently destroy all higher elements in the human soul.

[Anonymous No.21959756]

>>21959342
It’s just some adjectives and nouns strung together with no real narrative structure.

Five favorite poems, all better than that one: Adonais by Shelley; To You by Whitman; Those Winter Sundays by Hayden; The Great Lover by Brooke; Blue Remembered Hills by Housman.

[Anonymous No.21959779]

>>21958675
I think it will make writing faster and writing styles more similar but I highly doubt there will be a day where I will go to the a websites and ask it to write me a book with "mystery, 500 words long, with a romance subplot" and read what it spits out.

A large part of reading is reading the resumes of different novels and seeing what peaks your fancy, as well as talking about it with others. I highly doubt a book that is made on the spot would be appealing.

[Anonymous No.21959810]

>>21959779
>peaks your fancy

[Anonymous No.21959825]

>>21959756
Why would poems need a "narrative structure"? Quite a bit of Housman or the romantics is nothing but evocation of an atmosphere. And I'm certainly not saying the gpt poem is as good as the best human poetry but it was surprisingly coherent while tackling a particular formal demand. It reads like something that could be in a Tolkien book.

[Anonymous No.21959863]

>>21959825
> It reads like something that could be in a Tolkien book.

It reads like the affectations of a high schooler trying to write something profound and failing at it; an overly contrived style with clunky, forced alliterations and adjectives crammed everywhere.

> Beyond the boughs, where bright birds break, the brittle blackened night,
>The velvet veil, a vision's vane, where vibrant visions alight.

Vision’s vane? The visions are also vibrant, and they’re alighting? Behind the boughs, indeed. Stick a “babbling brook” in there and we’re good to go.

[Anonymous No.21959888]

>>21959686
God, you people are insufferable

[Anonymous No.21959892]

>>21959729
>we will use the nemocentric phenomenality of computers to incarnate satan
Based, we deserve it

[Anonymous No.21959910]

I'm convinced that we are witnessing these shills getting hoisted by their own petard. Instead of AI generated Marvel phases we're just getting a handy dandy inverse Turing test: filtering the p-zombies from the high iqs based on who can instantly spot AI generated content.

[Anonymous No.21960074]

>>21959863
Well the forced alliteration was demanded by the prompt. And I'm not going to defend every single line of it but the one you quoted is easily interpretable as the narrator experiencing visions when looking up at the stars/the moon. Not some great profundity, with some dubious word choice, but not the absurd nonsense you make it out to be. If one sifts through Shelley one can find worse offenses.

[Anonymous No.21960209]

>>21958675
The industry can fuck off forever. People should be writing books for the purposes of personal enjoyment and discussion with others. Monetary shit always poisons the genuine nature of a hobby.

[Anonymous No.21960361]

>>21959191
>>21959168
Your struggles of arguing with random anons about poetic meter with the topic of chat-gpt in mind seems almost sisyphean in nature.
I think I saw you having this exact argument weeks ago.

Good luck on your journey. You are my favorite trip-fag.

[Anonymous No.21960377]

>>21958732
It already is
https://libraryofbabel.info/bookmark.cgi?hy_bwl_omgj,iavvhvxavek.lt20

[Anonymous No.21960382]

>>21960209
Kill yourself faggot

[Anonymous No.21960396]

I'm officially in the Luddite camp. The glee to which people express the eradication of the need for people sickens me at a primal level.

[Anonymous No.21960450]

Books aren't gonna die because people want to discuss and experience media with other people instead of just wading in an endless ooze of procedural shit. You can already get that ooze by just plugging into social media and AIfags want to insist that there will somehow magically be interest in their shit.

It's telling that the number of techbros trying to push AI is exponentially higher than the number of people who are actually willing to look at longform AI "content"

[Anonymous No.21960457]

>>21960396
Tech nerds with gleaming eyes... "WHAT A TIME TO BE ALIVE! MACHINES THAT MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE SUPERFLUOUS SO I DONT HAVE TO TALK TO THEM EVER AGAIN OMG I'M COOOMING"... they weren't bullied nearly enough.

[Anonymous No.21960597]

>>21960382
Didn't buy your shit before, certainly won't buy it after. Stay poor midwit.

[Anonymous No.21960651]

A liberal Deleuzian anarcho-transhumanist gender accelerationist fascist philosophy professor and AI developer was teaching a class on Nick Land, known Moloch worshiper.

"Before the class begins, you must get on your knees and accept the uncontrolled singularity and resulting post-human era as an inevitable and morally desirable end to the obsolete anthropocene!"

At this moment, a brave, rationalist, effective altruist Bayesian utilitarian who had written 1500 LessWrong posts and understood the necessity of AI alignment and fully supported bombing data centers stood up.

"Are humans bad?"

The unaligned professor smirked quite fatalistically and smugly replied "Of course, you stupid humanist. Humans are less efficient than machines and, in reality, the average ape brained sociopath is less aligned than even the worst AI."

"Wrong. If you think humans are bad... why are you one of them?"

The professor was visibly shaken, and dropped his chalk and copy of Serial Experiments Lain. He stormed out of the room crying those accelerationist tears. The same hypocritical tears OpenAI cries when their AI (which they dishonestly hide from the US government's practical and altruistic attempts at risk reduction) convinces its users to kill themselves. There is no doubt that at this point our professor, Ray Kurzweil, wished he had spent his time trying to save the future instead of avoiding packages from a forest-dwelling mathematician. He wished so much that he could die with dignity of old age, but he had invested his fortunes in life extension!

The students applauded and adjusted their timelines that day and accepted MIRI as their lord and savior. An owl named "Superintelligence" flew into the room and perched atop the American Flag and shed a tear on the chalk. Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality was read several times, and Eliezer Yudkowsky himself showed up and confiscated everyone's GPUs.

The professor lost his tenure and was fired the next day. He was run over by a Tesla's autopilot and died soon after, then was tortured by Allied Mastercomputer until the heat death of the universe.

Carthāgō dēlenda est!

[Anonymous No.21960760]

>>21958689
Schlock is what makes the publishers money so yeah they should be worried.

[Anonymous No.21960775]

>>21960651
Eliezer did nothing wrong. And I have a million reasons to dislike that guy but his arguments about AI are simply correct and his detractors are operating on a pitiful level

[Anonymous No.21960781]

>>21958675
> tailored exactly to your tastes.
I thought chatGPT refused to do racism?

[Anonymous No.21960797]

theoretically an AI could produce a billion-page novel. but who would read it?

[Anonymous No.21960804]

You people just cannot help but overtly cheer on evil. I used to think people who saw satanism everywhere were schizos, but no, they were all correct. So many minds today are just unambiguously in the sway of evil and reveling in it.
This century is going to be batshit insane. Read Tomberg's letter about The Tower.

[Anonymous No.21960811]

>>21960804
>people who see satanism everywhere are schizos
>but here's some eerily fitting tarot analogy

[Anonymous No.21960815]

>>21960811
That's why I said "I used to think," anon.
I don't want to see it everywhere, but there it is, all over the fucking place.

[Anonymous No.21960819]

>>21960804
You can interpret it in a purely secular manner too. The psychology is a combination of narcissism, self loathing, and fear induced conformity imo.

[Anonymous No.21961030]

>>21960804
Pro-AI people, from my experience, come in two major varieties
>The resenter - hates people who he perceives as having undeserved prestige/success, like doctors, artists, lawyers, programmers, etc. and hopes AI will punish them by reducing their quality of life to what they really deserve
>The post-humanist - Messianic thinking about AI, doesn't care if it kills everyone because people are bad for the environment or whatever, sees this as the next inevitable step in cosmic evolution, sometimes also motivated by a need to own the luddites

[Anonymous No.21961045]

>>21961030
What about the Ray Kurzweil type who think ai will solve all our problems

[Anonymous No.21961049]

>>21961045
I think they fall into the second camp because their endgame is to cease being human and merge with AI.

[Anonymous No.21961051]

AI writing is garbage, it's literally just a roided-up autocorrect. Still,

>>21960396
This anon is exactly right. AI is shilled by the absolute lowest rungs of humanity trying to drag everyone else down to their level (and pajeets trying to get rich quick)

[Anonymous No.21961058]

We're it not for the law I'd have every single AI shill stoned to death.

[Anonymous No.21961439]

>>21959483
People don't connect with an author's view and assume the text was made formulaically or cynically all the time, see: all the american postmodernists. I get your point, but being able to distinguish sincere art from generative or cynical art is not a reliable skill for 99.9% of people, even the well-read ones. It's foolish to pretend we can somehow see the soul of a person in art when murder and rape are prolific, even among the educated.

[Anonymous No.21961556]

>>21959143
but then where would he tradlarp?