Determinist art is boring though

Sure. But derivative cliche ridden re-hashes are no great loss to anyone.

The gate keeping if reliable sources, however, as we’ve seen in recent years, is a critical function.

Zuckerberg and Musk’s etc refusal to accept editorial responsibility in tech platforms has been disastrous

Indeed. But corporate correspondence is far from good writing.

In fact, it’s one of the best examples of terrible writing you can find

I think you’re failing to understand that I’m agreeing with you

Exactly. A cliche machine as it stands.

I mean when ChatGPT has the flare and reasoning to know why “banal nonsense” was the best possible way to not only convey your idea but your tone and feeling.

That’s kind of how I feel about it too. If you engage in the text on its own terms, then it’s either good or it’s not.

Wasn’t photography supposed to destroy painting as well though?

If new writers cannot provide a single original thought, then perhaps they don’t deserve to break in anyway. No one is actually owed a successful novel, and if an expert craftsman can’t produce something any better than a literary sausage maker, then, well… perhaps this can provide some impetus for a sorely needed new phase of creativity.

Because it is quite notable that no one has done anything truly new and game since Tolkien - and he started writing more than a century ago.

You appear to completely agree with me

That’s not quite what I’m talking about.

The nature of actual artistic insight means it is impossible to mimic by virtue to the fact that successful mimicry in this sense cannot exist, because successful mimicry of insightful art would just be actual insightful art.

It’s not a question if “can a computer create something that looks like art”. We know it can. We already know that ChatGPT can produce good writing from the perspective if someone with no artistic understanding.

What’s fascinating here is the idea that AI could create actual art here, because it a machine is able to create something from which people gain a new or unique perspective via whatever artistic medium, then we have machines that aren’t mimicking, they’re just doing.

That’s not insight though, it’s just plagiarism.

Life might get difficult for shitty writers, but it’s very interesting to think about AI perhaps communicating some beautifully crafted artistic truth that we’ve never considered.

That’s the same thing as just doing it. You can’t mimic this factor, you either do it well or you do it badly. That’s it.

I’m very interested in the concept of AI developing deep and unique insights into the human experience.

It’s shit content though. I’m hoping this whole AI thing actually reduces the amount of bad writing overall, by highlighting just how terrible so much of it is.

Things like ChatGPT are appallingly bland, and dull, wordsmiths