myrmepropagandistFeb 4

My general dislike of AI writing has had a positive impact on how I read and listen to texts and scripts.

If I'm listening to a nature video, for example, and a sentence is empty of meaning or just illogical I turn that video off and avoid whoever made it.

Some of the things I've rejected probably weren't made by AI, but I don't see that as a bad thing.

My main issue with AI texts is I just find them kind of patronizing? You want me to sit and nicely listen but you can't be bothered to write?

Show threadOrange Lantern   Feb 4
@futurebird Well, I like to say „if nothing else, GenAI has teached me how little people pay attention to creative work.“

They don’t notice extra fingers or floating trees, they don’t notice badly written texts.
Working in media for years I basically knew that, but LLMs hammered home the point.

If that in turn leads to people actually looking at things, it’s hard to complain, though.
Show threadmyrmepropagandistFeb 4

@orangelantern

The extra fingers don't bother me as the lack of coherence. Here is a sentence that really turned me off:

"The balance of salt and fresh water in the body of the cone snail is an essential equilibrium between concentrations of water."

????

I can infer what the training texts that made this might have said: the interesting information about how snails can survive in a salty environment while land snails are sensitive to salt. But, this is saying next to nothing.

Show threadAbyssal Rook

@futurebird @orangelantern Seems directly related to the fingers thing, though. Wasn't the main issue causing finger deformation that the model would generate a section based off of what was next to it, so the smaller, intricate, and repetitive details get futzed up?

That sentence looks kinda similar. It took a bunch of sentences that said the same thing, picked the important bits of each sentence (balance, essential equilibrium, concentrations) and just...used all of them to be more important?

Feb 4 at 11:28amWeb