Haven’t we all read or seen something like this before at some point, especially within a science fiction or otherwise apocalyptic context? It certainly can’t be just me. Ergo this story is a meta-story of sorts. In which case, is the point to read through its vast interconnecting cliches, which, like the scales on a fish, constitute the very body or at least form of the same? A job, qua story maker, perhaps particularly suited for LLMs these days? It’s as though a person published a non-AI translation of a poem here, whose topic is both translation, plagiarism’s paradoxes, mimesis, and the surrealistic artistic implications—something along late Borgesian lines—to the point that some might think the latter had inspired the architecture of current day LLMs, beyond the fact that quantitative and qualitatively better translations were being attempted per se applicable to all writerly and thus translational domains. Almost certainly they were not theoretically influenced by such fields, but, put inversely, was this incoming pseudo-causal parallelism ever mentioned in Comparative Literature or Literary Translation graduate studies classes before AI came crashing down upon our heads, if not our heavens?
Haven’t we all read or seen something like this before at some point, especially within a science fiction or otherwise apocalyptic context? It certainly can’t be just me. Ergo this story is a meta-story of sorts. In which case, is the point to read through its vast interconnecting cliches, which, like the scales on a fish, constitute the very body or at least form of the same? A job, qua story maker, perhaps particularly suited for LLMs these days? It’s as though a person published a non-AI translation of a poem here, whose topic is both translation, plagiarism’s paradoxes, mimesis, and the surrealistic artistic implications—something along late Borgesian lines—to the point that some might think the latter had inspired the architecture of current day LLMs, beyond the fact that quantitative and qualitatively better translations were being attempted per se applicable to all writerly and thus translational domains. Almost certainly they were not theoretically influenced by such fields, but, put inversely, was this incoming pseudo-causal parallelism ever mentioned in Comparative Literature or Literary Translation graduate studies classes before AI came crashing down upon our heads, if not our heavens?