I'll tell you what I look for when I read, whether it's fiction or non-fiction: a connection with a human mind. That connection requires more than the words on the page.
There's an American scientist whose Substack I follow and I strongly suspect him of using AI to produce his most recent article. I read it and re-read it with growing frustration because I couldn't figure out what TF he was talking about: The words were all there but there was no logical flow of ideas that built on a foundation, as you'd expect from a human writing for a lay audience to achieve his readers' understanding. The grammar and syntax were correct but it was just a bunch of words not saying anything, and after a few tries at penetrating it I thought, "Goddamn it, is this AI?" So I went back to his earliest posts from two years ago. Back then he was writing in his own voice, conveying his own enthusiasm or skepticism for the topics. The latest article had none of that, and that's crap. I liked knowing a scientist who could teach me something, from his mind to mine. It pisses me off that that quality is gone, and that his machine-produced slop wasted my time and didn't teach me anything. It added nothing good to my life, it gave me no pleasure, and all I have left of the article is the irritation it produced. I don't even remember the topic, and I doubt that was his intent.
Aristotle said that the philosophical importance of fiction is greater than that of history, because "history represents things as they are, while fiction represents them as they might be and ought to be." No software can meet that standard because it can't convey a sense of life through the words it chooses to include and omit. Software has no sense of life. There's no intelligence behind it, no value-judgements, and no mind. There's just a prompt, and a prompt isn't a connection.
About 4 years ago I commented on a Midwestern crocks flubstack that I thought a recent article was AI generated BS diverting readers away from potential harmful effects from recent scientific ‘breakthroughs’ ie; nanoscale 3d printed ‘ingredients’ inserted across multiple vectors.
Overall it wasn't a bad piece. Kinda like something you'd find in an older Newsweek or Reader's Digest. A bit too plastic and a bit too perfectly encapsulated, but fully fit for the purpose of getting people to think about the reality of a multi-trillion dollar industry that contracts in the face of individual health and well being.
Are you familiar with Count Metalmind and his Substack Circuit and Sin? https://countmetalmind.substack.com/ It's alleged to be written by an AI, but I have doubts bordering on certainty about that. The narrative stories are too rough around the edges and too human to be genesised from an AI. I am thinking that a human writes the posts and then washes them, through an AI filter to give the impression that it was AI written. I bring this up because it may be of interest to you in your current activities. If not... Keep on keeping on!
I think its overall a good idea. And don't forget, Reader's Digest had better subscription numbers than Playboy, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American put together. There is definitely an audience for people who don't want to be offended or even emotionally engaged really, or intellectually tested by what they are reading and those are the people we most need to find a way to connect with. They are the heart of the middle.
Thanks Jonathan. I have to say I really am not interested in AI. On my search engine I have an AI search assistant which can be useful for finding initial information, but really all I want is data crunching and not AI written articles.
I need my brain to function and be stimulated which AI stuff will not do. It will end up being all the same and boring and that is not what life is about.
The enemies of humanity may flood the zone with bullshit but it is boring bullshit. I can produce much funnier bullshit! Well, I like it anyway. :<)
I'll tell you what I look for when I read, whether it's fiction or non-fiction: a connection with a human mind. That connection requires more than the words on the page.
There's an American scientist whose Substack I follow and I strongly suspect him of using AI to produce his most recent article. I read it and re-read it with growing frustration because I couldn't figure out what TF he was talking about: The words were all there but there was no logical flow of ideas that built on a foundation, as you'd expect from a human writing for a lay audience to achieve his readers' understanding. The grammar and syntax were correct but it was just a bunch of words not saying anything, and after a few tries at penetrating it I thought, "Goddamn it, is this AI?" So I went back to his earliest posts from two years ago. Back then he was writing in his own voice, conveying his own enthusiasm or skepticism for the topics. The latest article had none of that, and that's crap. I liked knowing a scientist who could teach me something, from his mind to mine. It pisses me off that that quality is gone, and that his machine-produced slop wasted my time and didn't teach me anything. It added nothing good to my life, it gave me no pleasure, and all I have left of the article is the irritation it produced. I don't even remember the topic, and I doubt that was his intent.
Aristotle said that the philosophical importance of fiction is greater than that of history, because "history represents things as they are, while fiction represents them as they might be and ought to be." No software can meet that standard because it can't convey a sense of life through the words it chooses to include and omit. Software has no sense of life. There's no intelligence behind it, no value-judgements, and no mind. There's just a prompt, and a prompt isn't a connection.
Well said. Reminds me of Shakespeare's Macbeth which I studied to death at school.
"It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing."
About 4 years ago I commented on a Midwestern crocks flubstack that I thought a recent article was AI generated BS diverting readers away from potential harmful effects from recent scientific ‘breakthroughs’ ie; nanoscale 3d printed ‘ingredients’ inserted across multiple vectors.
Overall it wasn't a bad piece. Kinda like something you'd find in an older Newsweek or Reader's Digest. A bit too plastic and a bit too perfectly encapsulated, but fully fit for the purpose of getting people to think about the reality of a multi-trillion dollar industry that contracts in the face of individual health and well being.
Are you familiar with Count Metalmind and his Substack Circuit and Sin? https://countmetalmind.substack.com/ It's alleged to be written by an AI, but I have doubts bordering on certainty about that. The narrative stories are too rough around the edges and too human to be genesised from an AI. I am thinking that a human writes the posts and then washes them, through an AI filter to give the impression that it was AI written. I bring this up because it may be of interest to you in your current activities. If not... Keep on keeping on!
Readers Digest…yes, a good observation!
I’m starting to regret even trying this….!
I think its overall a good idea. And don't forget, Reader's Digest had better subscription numbers than Playboy, Popular Mechanics, and Scientific American put together. There is definitely an audience for people who don't want to be offended or even emotionally engaged really, or intellectually tested by what they are reading and those are the people we most need to find a way to connect with. They are the heart of the middle.
Thanks Jonathan. I have to say I really am not interested in AI. On my search engine I have an AI search assistant which can be useful for finding initial information, but really all I want is data crunching and not AI written articles.
I need my brain to function and be stimulated which AI stuff will not do. It will end up being all the same and boring and that is not what life is about.
The enemies of humanity may flood the zone with bullshit but it is boring bullshit. I can produce much funnier bullshit! Well, I like it anyway. :<)
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/hantavirus-and-the-variants-a-light
I've gotten in the habit of adding "-ai" to my search terms and it seems to help filter out the slop.
Love this fictional story spin. I agree use any and all tools to create interest / provoke ideas.