this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
35 points (100.0% liked)

technology

24153 readers
365 users here now

On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.

Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Archive link

Actually decent article from the New York Crimes on AI generated text.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Philosoraptor@hexbear.net 17 points 1 month ago (3 children)

What nobody really anticipated was that inhuman machines generating text strings through essentially stochastic recombination might be funny. But GPT had a strange, brilliant, impressively deadpan sense of humor. It had a habit of breaking off midway through a response and generating something entirely different. Once, it decided to ignore my request and instead give me an opinion column titled “Why Are Men’s Penises in Such a Tizzy?” (“No, you just can’t help but think of the word ‘butt’ in your mind’s eye whenever you watch male porn, for obvious reasons. It’s all just the right amount of subtlety in male porn, and the amount of subtlety you can detect is simply astounding.”) When I tried to generate some more newspaper headlines, they included “A Gun Is Out There,” “We Have No Solution” and “Spiders Are Getting Smarter, and So, So Loud.”

I ended up sinking several months into an attempt to write a novel with the thing. It insisted that chapters should have titles like “Another Mountain That Is Very Surprising,” “The Wetness of the Potatoes” or “New and Ugly Injuries to the Brain.” The novel itself was, naturally, titled “Bonkers From My Sleeve.” There was a recurring character called the Birthday Skeletal Oddity. For a moment, it was possible to imagine that the coming age of A.I.-generated text might actually be a lot of fun.

This is what they took from us.

[–] Johnny_Arson@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But GPT had a strange, brilliant, impressively deadpan sense of humor.

Face the wall please.

[–] Philosoraptor@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I dunno, a lot of the early (pre-commercially viable) versions of these tools were significantly more interesting largely in virtue of the fact that they didn't reliably give you exactly what you wanted. As a kind of creative tool, that can actually be useful (or at the very least produce output that's not just more of the same). The early Deep Dream versions where it hallucinated eyes and dogs all over everything (e.g. ) at least had a distinctive psychedelic style that was kind of neat, and suggesting things like “Why Are Men’s Penises in Such a Tizzy?” or “Spiders Are Getting Smarter, and So, So Loud” as NYT opinion columns is actually pretty funny. In both those cases, it's the failure mode that's interesting in virtue of the gap between what people were asking for and what they were getting. There's some space to play in there. As tech companies managed to round off those sharp corners and move toward commercial viability, this sort of light surrealism converged on the homogenous slop we all hate today. Part of what makes these things suck so hard is that they're totally frictionless: they will bend over backward to do exactly what you want exactly how you want it, while also producing something that looks exactly like how you'd expect the exact average of every piece of art ever produced would look. It's both sycophantic and boring, and the output is the artistic version of pink slime formed into the shape of different foods.

[–] Johnny_Arson@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

Biblically accurate pennywise

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If spiders became loud I could imagine my anti-spider movement finally taking off.

[–] WokePalpatine@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago

Also, the point about people preferring the AI prose/poetry at the end . . . They're probably bot comments, but yeah, the real people who do prefer AI writing is because it's basically that same condensation/pornification of everything happening right now where people respond to signifiers in a thing rather than the thing in totality. I am deeply skeptical people are broadly conscious on the level we ascribe them and when you ask them something they're prone to tell you some bullshit they just hallucinated in response.

Like, I'm not a big fan of hip hop. It's cool it exists, I like some hip hop but I don't actually know why this is. I can guess it's because I like more melody-driven stuff. I can guess it's because I don't live a lifestyle that harmonizes with that kind of music or I wasn't raised with it and thus it feels alien to me. But I don't know any of that. So if someone asks my why I don't and I'm not conscious enough to know that I don't know, I can just hallucinate this long argument about the better musicality of metal, etc. etc. but it's all bullshit.

A lot of the shit people say on the internet both isn't true broadly, and isn't even true to themselves, it's just thought-reflex. Part of getting a new communist subject is going to be forcing people to be more conscious of themselves.

[–] comrade_pibb@hexbear.net 4 points 1 month ago

Yeah but why are the penises all in a tizzy??