• Ech
    link
    fedilink
    41 year ago

    Do you think that person was signing up for jobs writing for blogs or content farms?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -21 year ago

      Have you read some low quality journalism? The whole yellow press can be replaced with GTP and no one would ever see a difference.

      • Ech
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        Ok, so do you wanna talk about your terrible writing partner in school? Or “yellow press”? Or maybe the topic of the article, which isn’t journalism in the slightest? Or how about my point, which was, again, that even bad writers have context, as opposed to an LLM which is just filling in the arbitrary patterns it’s programmed to delineate. Readability is not what I’m talking about.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -21 year ago

          Dude, what’s with aggression? We just having a conversation that floats along. I’m talking about general LLMs capabilities to write text - which are in my opinion comparable to human writing, since again - a lot of people lack the same things LLMs generated texts are lacking. And I had some examples. No idea what made you so upset.

          • Ech
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            You brought up several different, unrelated topics and pretty much ignored anything I said to disprove something I never claimed. That is frustrating to deal with.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -21 year ago

              Except you are the one who responded to me. And if there is a point you made I overlooked - I will gladly answer it. I also didn’t disprove anything - just voiced my opinion. I’m not interested in a debate club and winning arguments, just sharing opinions and trying to understand others.

              • Ech
                link
                fedilink
                21 year ago

                The top comment is about how LLMs don’t comprehend what they’re writing, and your first comment (as I read it) was about how LLMs work how human brains do. My point was that they don’t and why, not about how good or bad humans or machines are at writing, which is what you kept bringing up, hence the frustration.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -11 year ago

                  My first comment is, that there are enough humans out there that don’t really comprehend what they are writing and often also make shit up as they go. I was not talking about the underlying mechanism, which is rather speculative since we have little idea how complex functions of the brain - like text generation, work. Just making a humorous light hearted comparison.

                  Our conversation is a nice illustration how, maybe we as humans aren’t as good at understanding text - as we might think. (Again - that is a light hearted comment and not some profound complex observation).

                  • Ech
                    link
                    fedilink
                    01 year ago

                    To be clear, I’m not talking about underlying mechanisms, either, but the approach to the task. A human writer, even one bad at writing and not understanding the topic, will approach the writing with a goal and write to that goal and topic. They can even research if they so choose, but even if they are just making things up, there is intent and context there.

                    An LLM doesn’t have any of that. It literally just generates words that match certain patterns, with no actual purpose or goal. It may have been programmed with a goal in mind, but it doesn’t have one of its own. It can’t reason, it can’t research, it can’t make decisions. I think that is an important distinction that people who are just saying “Who cares? It’s all bad writing anyways” are missing.