I understand that you’re leaving and think that’s wise and healthy, but am leaving an explanation since I didn’t earlier (expecting a longer conversation).
What I am interested in is the process of a human writing a particular passage somehow. I can imagine a few scenarios and view them as similarly “testimonial”, given that they result in the same text:
A human writes a sonnet “solo”.
A human thumbs through the thesaurus for synonyms for “autumn”.
A human uses a computer to look up “nouns that begin with G”.
A human uses a computer to generate crappy sonnets and splices a few dozen together.
A human uses a computer to generate sonnets and selects one.
I view these as similarly at our current stage of computer sophistication because the intelligence that created the particular sonnet lives inside the human’s head. If they were just prompting Original ChatGPT with “write me a good sonnet”, the result would be bad, but in this article the claim was made that a sonnet we all liked would have its connection to human art and emotion severed if a computer generated it and was edited, and I think that argument proves too much since it seems to have me look down on thesaurus use.
(I will not reply further but really did not want to exit the thread without making my case for my position. I wanted to check whether this was the appropriate case to make or if something else would be more appropriate, but something is better than nothing)
That’s just wrong, but I don’t want to prosecute that argument here. I hope you’ll eventually realize that it’s wrong.
I understand that you’re leaving and think that’s wise and healthy, but am leaving an explanation since I didn’t earlier (expecting a longer conversation).
What I am interested in is the process of a human writing a particular passage somehow. I can imagine a few scenarios and view them as similarly “testimonial”, given that they result in the same text:
A human writes a sonnet “solo”.
A human thumbs through the thesaurus for synonyms for “autumn”.
A human uses a computer to look up “nouns that begin with G”.
A human uses a computer to generate crappy sonnets and splices a few dozen together.
A human uses a computer to generate sonnets and selects one.
I view these as similarly at our current stage of computer sophistication because the intelligence that created the particular sonnet lives inside the human’s head. If they were just prompting Original ChatGPT with “write me a good sonnet”, the result would be bad, but in this article the claim was made that a sonnet we all liked would have its connection to human art and emotion severed if a computer generated it and was edited, and I think that argument proves too much since it seems to have me look down on thesaurus use.
(I will not reply further but really did not want to exit the thread without making my case for my position. I wanted to check whether this was the appropriate case to make or if something else would be more appropriate, but something is better than nothing)