![]() |
ChatGPT |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1 121314 |
Author | |
Popsicle Crows ![]() NYC Midnight Black Belt ![]() ![]() Joined: 30 Mar 2021 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 2421 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
Suave ![]() NYC Midnight Black Belt ![]() Joined: 25 Jan 2015 Location: Thailand Status: Offline Points: 23072 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
MartyEss ![]() NYC Midnight Addict ![]() ![]() Joined: 15 Jun 2022 Location: New England Status: Offline Points: 729 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
I can't believe it's come to this. Well, I guess I should say I am pained that it has come to this; it's actually quite believable, unfortunately.
Let's do our own work. Let's not try to cheat other competitors. Let us not give up one of the things that most makes us human (in the good sense), to effing AI.
|
|
![]() |
|
KirrilyK ![]() NYC Midnight Regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 10 Jun 2022 Location: Australia Status: Offline Points: 284 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Sorry, wrong thread.
Edited by KirrilyK - 25 Mar 2023 at 1:20am |
|
![]() |
|
FireHorse ![]() NYC Midnight Black Belt ![]() Joined: 13 Jul 2020 Location: Sydney Status: Offline Points: 3055 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
My gut feel is that AI tends towards the average.
By default, it works statistically from a huge dataset. Creativity stands out on the margins. It's why some of the most loved artists are also some of the most hated artists. So if you're happy being average, AI can take you out. But it will never be as good at being you as you are. A slightly cheery report based on research: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/mar/05/panic-not-chatgpt-will-help-you-write-better-but-wont-take-your-job-yet Now, they're talking about business factual writing projects, but the same principles apply. Specificity matters and AI just isn't that good at it. The Guardian also had a piece where they asked readers to guess which copy was AI-written and which human. (If you think of politicians as human! ![]() https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/feb/11/who-said-it-an-australian-mp-or-chatgpt Includes this spectacular piece of human phrasing: From Palm Beach to Manly, from Bondi to Little Bay, and across Pittwater to Patonga, - specific beaches, some famous for the non-beach-goers, other best-kept secrets. Bet much of the Sydney population has been to at least one of these beaches so is immediately drawn in. More know the iconic ones and get at least some connection. - rhetoric - three pairs of beaches. Good for the human ear, especially changing up the wording of the last to indicate the finish. - rhetoric - alliteration in the choice of beaches to include - and they work geographically too. Gonna be a long time till AI can produce that. Of course most humans don't produce writing to that level all the time either, but that's what I mean about getting away from the average. Maybe I'm just an optimist, but I don't think human writing is dead yet. Bad human writing might be, average human writing has competition, but good human writing will still be around. And that's what we're all striving for, right?
|
|
![]() |
|
aceofkittens ![]() NYC Midnight Newbie ![]() ![]() Joined: 01 Jun 2012 Status: Offline Points: 88 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Fascinating discussion, very relevant to my interests both as a professional marketing writer / editor working in tech and a creative writer.
Here's my take on ChatGPT, slightly different than the posts I've read here so far. My manager at work actually directed me to investigate the various AI writing programs. I've tried out Jasper, ChatGPT, and Google's Bard. It's been really fun to play with this tech and have it churn out (for example) SEO blog copy / SEO titles / SEO metadescs. The writing is not brilliant by any means and it requires a lot of heavy editing. ChatGPT especially tends to be kind of repetitive once it gets on a particular subject. Reading its copy, however, often sparks me to have a better idea. I've also REALLY enjoyed writing something and then pasting it into ChatGPT with the directive: "Rewrite this paragraph so that even a salesperson can understand it." ;) Additionally, I've been asking the AI programs to write me some song lyrics in the style of (whatever band). Let's just say that none of those bands need to be worried about being replaced by AI. Here's Chat GPT's attempt at "the style of Taylor Swift." I know we just met, but it feels like we've known each other forever, Every moment with you is a memory I'll treasure, I don't know what the future holds, But I know I want you in it, forever and always, until we're old. Yeah, no. Last, but not least: I also write a quarterly blog post for an animal-related online magazine. Just for fun, I ran my blog posts through Chat Zero and GPTZero. These posts were 100% written by me, with no AI involvement whatsoever. In fact, they were all written last year before Chat GPT was even on my radar. The results: both sites thought that my posts were "most likely" human written, but flagged anywhere between 20-34% of the content as potentially AI-generated. Does this mean I'm actually robot? Does this mean I'm a sh*tty writer? OR MAYBE BOTH?!?!?!?!? *buckets of tears* |
|
![]() |
|
FireHorse ![]() NYC Midnight Black Belt ![]() Joined: 13 Jul 2020 Location: Sydney Status: Offline Points: 3055 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
@aceof kittens I write professionally too. Usually start nby interviewing client and recording, so I get original content in terms of stories, examples and voice.
Ran that recorded text through ChatGPT with an instruction to turn it into a blog post. Took out all the originality. Readability 3 grades above my copy. Flat wall of paragraphs with never a subheading or a bullet point in sight. Yup, heavy editing needed - not sure it saved me time either...
Edited by FireHorse - 27 Mar 2023 at 8:31am |
|
![]() |
|
Popsicle Crows ![]() NYC Midnight Black Belt ![]() ![]() Joined: 30 Mar 2021 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 2421 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
People wrestling with AI and the blanding of society have been using the *idea* of AI to come up with some fabulous stories about this time in history. @aceofkittens mentioning that her boss asked her to research bots made me think of one of the reddit threads where people wrote shorts about being asked to build the robot that will replace them. They were hilarious and haunting. I hope to see some of them published.
I noticed an increase in content farms when I looked up some non-technical advice on screenwriting. The repetitive results made me curious so I looked up a bunch of other 'how-to' subjects with a wider range of topics but narrowed the search to only new articles. It's like the Niagara Falls of repetitive blogs. I found three content producers who are responsible for a ton of them. Almost all the 'authors' were traced to India, like the mis/dis-information farms regarding covid and politics. This time it's totally different and unrelated topics. I think they look for something trendy or a popular writer and then feed their headers into a cheatbot. The pages all had many offers of help with cat diseases/making candles/cutting trees/cleaning a carburator etc and had many 'contact me' offers but zero had an actual way to contact someone, lol. Every search engine trick in the book was used to push their content up. Strangely, most of these new websites have 41 pages. Why 41? No idea. 18 of 21 new information sites had 41 pages, no actual contact method that worked and pages were always looped to refer back to itself, a bit like the first flood of misleading covid advice or the phoney Trudeau, Clinton, "news". Trace them back and you can often find the source they used, fake 'newspaper', fake medical journal or now some blogger's home page and their list of topics.
I wrote two of the bloggers and pointed out how a few of the new sites coincidentally used their list of articles to create a string of webpages with identical headers. The copy cats used their exact titles but the articles were different. Bloggers are being copied at a pretty fast pace already it seems. Many have 'interviews' that are snippets of what the article's expert said somewhere else. Thankfully, the pieces of someone's speech are intact so those were easy to trace back to the original interviews, which were sometimes decades apart. Makes me appreciate non-textbook writing even more. I'm far too lazy to run everything through a chatcatcher. Cheatbots are the new hammer. |
|
![]() |
|
Popsicle Crows ![]() NYC Midnight Black Belt ![]() ![]() Joined: 30 Mar 2021 Location: Canada Status: Offline Points: 2421 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Heck no! Your ideas and voice will always be originally yours but if you write 'properly', the chat catchers see the normal textbook perfect(ly boring) writing that a computer can do also. Most good writers are getting around the same range for their articles, especially if they're someone who has been well educated. Less skilled writers - me, lol, get one or two percent and that's only because I probably used a period at the end of sentences. They can't take your voice or ideas. You'll always be a handmade heirloom in a sea of knockoffs. |
|
![]() |
Post Reply ![]() |
Page <1 121314 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |