TechTakes

1480 readers

311 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

dgerard@awful.systems

Study claims that "AI-generated poetry is indistinguishable from human-written poetry and is rated more favorably." WaPo, The Guardian, The Telegraph, and others picked it up. Here's my response. (theluddite.org)

submitted 1 week ago by theluddite@lemmy.ml to c/techtakes@awful.systems

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Though wrapped in the aesthetic of science, this paper is a pure expression of the AI hype's ideology, including its reliance on invisible, alienated labor. Its data was manufactured to spec to support the authors' pre-existing beliefs, and its conclusions are nothing but a re-articulation of their arrogance and ideological impoverishment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

First reaction: "Wait, that was in Nature?"

Second reaction: "Oh, Nature Scientific Reports. The 'we have Nature at home' of science journals."

Among many insights, Davis (politely) points out that one of the AI-generated Chaucer poems is just "the opening of the Prologue to the Canterbury Tales."

Whan that Aprille with the fuck?

[–] theluddite@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 week ago

That's exactly why the series is about papers on Nature.com. They're trading on the prestige of the domain to spinoff various portfolio journals and companies get to go to potential customers saying, "according to a study published in Nature..."