• gapbetweenus@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Bad writing is still a step above rng junk, imo.

    I’v read writing worse than GTP. I had to help someone write an essay - and I just wrote it for him in the end, because he absolutely lacked the skills to write a long meaningful text. At at the same time - genius of a percussionist.

    • Ech@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you think that person was signing up for jobs writing for blogs or content farms?

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you read some low quality journalism? The whole yellow press can be replaced with GTP and no one would ever see a difference.

        • Ech@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ok, so do you wanna talk about your terrible writing partner in school? Or “yellow press”? Or maybe the topic of the article, which isn’t journalism in the slightest? Or how about my point, which was, again, that even bad writers have context, as opposed to an LLM which is just filling in the arbitrary patterns it’s programmed to delineate. Readability is not what I’m talking about.

          • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dude, what’s with aggression? We just having a conversation that floats along. I’m talking about general LLMs capabilities to write text - which are in my opinion comparable to human writing, since again - a lot of people lack the same things LLMs generated texts are lacking. And I had some examples. No idea what made you so upset.

            • Ech@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You brought up several different, unrelated topics and pretty much ignored anything I said to disprove something I never claimed. That is frustrating to deal with.

              • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Except you are the one who responded to me. And if there is a point you made I overlooked - I will gladly answer it. I also didn’t disprove anything - just voiced my opinion. I’m not interested in a debate club and winning arguments, just sharing opinions and trying to understand others.

                • Ech@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The top comment is about how LLMs don’t comprehend what they’re writing, and your first comment (as I read it) was about how LLMs work how human brains do. My point was that they don’t and why, not about how good or bad humans or machines are at writing, which is what you kept bringing up, hence the frustration.

                  • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    My first comment is, that there are enough humans out there that don’t really comprehend what they are writing and often also make shit up as they go. I was not talking about the underlying mechanism, which is rather speculative since we have little idea how complex functions of the brain - like text generation, work. Just making a humorous light hearted comparison.

                    Our conversation is a nice illustration how, maybe we as humans aren’t as good at understanding text - as we might think. (Again - that is a light hearted comment and not some profound complex observation).