m_ott’s avatarm_ott’s Twitter Archive—№ 21,239

      1. …in reply to @jon_raRaRa
        jon_raRaRa stefanjudis I’d say the difference lies in the process. The AI is producing a random approximation until the outcome matches the criteria of the training data. You are creating something with intent, you’re thinking about your audience, you’re trying to evoke emotions, and so on.
        Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo m_ott’s avatar 2022 Nov 6 Mood 0
    1. …in reply to @m_ott
      jon_raRaRa stefanjudis All originality that will ever come out of an AI is a happy accident. When *you* write something – regardless of its quality – there’s always a creative process involved that can lead to original ideas because it draws from your imagination.
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo m_ott’s avatar 2022 Nov 6 Mood +5 🙂
  1. …in reply to @m_ott
    jon_raRaRa stefanjudis But we tend to primarily look at the outcome. And here, it is/will be hard to know who or what wrote a text. Maybe if you’re only typing down a few boring facts without any attempt to create emotion, wonder, or excitement in your audience, then you’re only *producing* a text? 😅
    On twitter.com Twitter logo m_ott’s avatar 2022 Nov 6 Mood -1 🙁
    1. …in reply to @m_ott
      jon_raRaRa stefanjudis It will then also be harder to distinguish your work from the output of an AI. It might even be considered to be worse by some. On the other hand, if it’s only remotely original or personal, it’s *written*. But will we be able to identify this in the future? And by what? 🤔
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo m_ott’s avatar ❤️ 1 Favorite 2022 Nov 6 Mood -3 🙁