No one can predict the future. Even Nostradamus, the 바카라바카라man who saw through time바카라바카라, got it wrong off and on. But I feel pretty confident in making this prediction: GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformers)바카라neural network models that enable apps like ChatGPT to produce 바카라human-like바카라 text, images and music바카라won바카라t be wiping out the tribe of fiction writers, poets and artists from the planet any time soon.
Aren바카라t GPT models a stunning breakthrough in Artificial Intelligence (AI)? Of course they are. Aren바카라t the scale and speed at which they execute tasks amazing? Of course, they are mighty gods of efficiency. They excel at data extraction, translation, document summarisation; generate marketing material, targeted blog posts and animations; build websites and produce specific content for social media campaigns. Businesses across the world are using them. Many a hotshot marketing campaign swears by them. But this is not about what the machines do. This is about what they are not바카라human.
In his 2023 New York Times essay, 바카라The False Promise of ChatGPT바카라, Naom Chomsky said, 바카라OpenAI바카라s ChatGPT, Google바카라s Bard and Microsoft바카라s Sydney are marvels of machine learning바카라These programs have been hailed as the first glimmers on the horizon of artificial general intelligence바카라that long-prophesied moment when mechanical minds surpass human brains not only quantitatively but also qualitatively in terms of intellectual insight, artistic creativity and every other distinctively human faculty. That day may come, but its dawn is not yet breaking바카라바카라
The creation of literature and art, however flawed, are human activities forged in the crucible of lived experience. A story or a novel or a piece of art spring from a particular consciousness. An individual sensibility at work. In the heart of the Russian winter, Anton Chekhov made a set of choices. In Victorian England, Virginia Woolf made a whole other set of choices. And so we have The Seagull and Uncle Vanya and the Cherry Orchard; we have To the Lighthouse and Mrs Dalloway and A Room of One바카라s Own.
AI systems homogenise language, whereas language runs like hot blood through a writer바카라s veins. A writer바카라s sensory experiences바카라touch and taste, sights and sounds of the world around바카라shape her stories. They breathe life into settings, into characters and their inner lives. When I write a story, I channel every sight I have seen, every emotion that pierced my heart, for better or for worse. Creative writing teachers tend to talk a lot about 바카라바카라voice바카라바카라, how voice can make or break your short story or novel. What is voice? It is the life that animates your writing, the flesh that grows on the bare bones of your ideas, the electric spark that makes your sentences crackle and sing. You can mine all the data on the planet and feed them to Large Language Models, you can finesse the Models till kingdom comes, but chances are zero to none that they will create another War and Peace or Gone With the Wind or Gitanjali. My point: human-like is not the same as human. Technological mimicry has its limits. Especially when it comes to creativity and originality.
Ted Chiang, the uncannily prescient sci-fi writer, pointed out in an interview that AI engineers who link words such as 바카라learn바카라, 바카라know바카라 바카라understand바카라 and personal pronouns like 바카라I바카라 with chatbots such as ChatGPT, create the false perception that these AI tools are sentient entities. 바카라The machines we have now, they바카라re not conscious,바카라 said Chiang. Without consciousness, creation is not even a remote possibility. Art is marinated in individual consciousness. It cannot bloom in the confines of a programmed machine, no matter how state-of-the art, efficient, or marketable the machine may be. Chiang바카라s novella The Lifecycle of Software Objects, a brilliantly imagined work of fiction, depicts artificial intelligences that were built in a digital world as entities that need human 바카라parenting바카라 and a whole lot of handholding to understand the real world. Despite all the help humans provide, they still struggle. I바카라d say it바카라s recommended reading for anyone who fears the machines will take over and that human creativity is doomed!
According to Jeff Hancock, Professor of Communication at Stanford University, the ability of AI systems to generate text is a blessing and a curse in terms of communication. It has major implications for how humans communicate and for human-computer interactions. This is a grey area right now as not much research has not been done on it yet. But it is safe to say that AI systems will change the skillsets writers need in the future. Writers who learn to work with these tools and use them to their advantage will have an edge in the job market. A recent news report about job losses among copywriters in a UK-based company came with an interesting twist. Several members of a team of copywriters lost their jobs due to automation. Since the AI model was cheaper, the company gave it the task of generating outlines and writing articles. This did not go as planned though. The AI-generated articles turned out to have a weird, overtly formal tone and did not sound 바카라human바카라 enough. In order to solve the problem, some of the flesh and blood copywriters were brought back to the office in order to humanise the AI-generated text and make it sound less stilted!
