this whole article is a worthwhile read, one notable thing to me is just how generative ai enthusiasts always seem to swing back around to the perspective that actually humans have nothing to offer
Is that so different from what humans do? Rollins wonders. “There’s arguments that no one’s ever thought of an original new thought in a century,” he said. “Everything that’s been said has been said, that we were all just saying stuff that’s a regurgitation of what somebody else has said. So are we really being original in any of our thoughts? Or do we take a thought and then put our own unique perspective on it?”
i can't help but feel sad that apparently some people have just never been moved by art, and that this guy thinks his ai-generated self-help books and novel about a hustle culture unicorn is equivalent to what writers do
even when reading dry technical books for work, it's such a pleasure to read a work where someone carefully thought through its contents after spending so much time trawling through content posts trying to find answers to specific problems.
i think i've written on here before how i'm always looking for the "love" in a work, just some proof that the people making it cared or put something of themselves in it, some indication they thought it was worthwhile to produce or for others to see. so much of this article is about people assembling text that they don't particularly care if anyone reads. even the fiction author realizes she's lost track of the love in her work, which is too bad - it's the difference between her and the LLM