I continue to be no less than astounded, not only by Mary’s ability to conglomerate a number of vital culture-tech emergencies (in the sense of having just emerged) but to do so with style.
I’d no idea about her background as a writer, but it’s served her well, even though she almost certainly wouldn’t have realised that whilst going through the motions in her former career. She’s positioned herself, as far as i’m concerned, at the forefront of cultural interpretation simply by bringing to our attention and synthesising trends which might otherwise escape detection.
That’s not to say she’ll always get it right, even if there was such a thing; but that hardly matters. She’s a living example of the human ability she seeks to foretell in this article, always a step or two ahead of the bots.
”Humans will defeat the chatbots”
Mary’s headline – and I did not feel she demonstrated her thesis – lots of fun and pretty writing, but all I got was a that a few human writers will remain, as a few artisan weavers are out there making Craft/Art decorative things to sell – but for fabric we turn to the machine made.
I doubt it was Mary’s headline.
Quite often, it seems the Unherd editorial team will produce an headline to grab attention, and sometimes change the headline whilst the topic is still “live”.
Peter Johnson
3 months ago
“ If you want the bland, normative, politically unimpeachable top-line consensus on any given topic, ask Chat-GPT about it and you’ll get three paragraphs of serviceable prose.” Or just read consensus narrative served up daily by the entire mainstream media.
Which is why Chat-GPT is really a threat to all the hacks playing the game in the MSM. They should be very afraid – something that can write exactly what they write, only grammatically correct and properly spelt.
Meanwhile all us sceptics out in the dark will continue to be ignored, but to happily engage with each other. I see a new heaven, and a new dawn.
Historian Neil Ferguson used a demo on the last ‘Goodfellows’ podcast, asking for an opinion ‘in the style of’ himself. It was rather startlingly, albeit somewhat generic, in that, it can only build on what’s available, not on what he is thinking now …
I’ve seen another example on Twitter ‘in the style of’ Yeats. The context was contemporary, but the style was definitely ‘Yeats’.
I have spent years watching people look for corners where us humans can find some value in what we do… the first I can remember was people will always want the feel of a newspaper (and the serendipity of the curated ‘read’)… that one didn’t wear well.
As a press photographer on a far off planet a long long time ago I remember noticing that the most memorable images of the Gulf war were, for the first time video snippets, and the stills, from robot cameras on US planes (now drones) or in the missiles themselves, blowing up whatever they were aimed at.
Thousands of photographers including many hundreds with various bits of the military produced virtually nothing.
Until it was over anyway, on that road to Basra.
These days it’s domestic cctv, dashcams, and mobile phones.
as the author said, some photographers can earn a living ‘within the new system’ but they are fewer every year and the living is always more precarious every year.
… it will be interesting to see how this radically transforms our current system of education … As example, a neuro-link chip implant enhanced with AI & internet access, at birth, could place any human into a pre-ordained slot for optimum civil functionality. School, per se, could become redundant.
Graham Willis
3 months ago
It is grand scale mimicry, uncomprehending. I am sure it will produce convincing French philosophy. It would be interesting if someone could get a PhD with it.
That is a great question. You should try. (When you ask for X number of words it seems to have a breakdown.)
R Wright
3 months ago
The idea of a racism Voight-Kampff test needing to be used to check one is human amid a miasma of artificial political correctness might be the funniest yet most terrifying thing I have ever heard. A superb essay as ever.
Robert Hochbaum
3 months ago
“It’s just like a human being except it has all the world’s knowledge.”
This is just the latest statement from a tech world leader that has made me, over time, come to distrust the whole culture they have inspired and built. ChatGPTs ability to rapidly assemble huge quantities of data, along with its ability to select an appropriate style guide for assembling that data into 750 words is not thinking. It’s not creating. I’m not even sure all that data out there is actually knowledge. Increasingly, its just data. Is the data out there that shows that many people around the world believe the world is flat knowledge?
Perhaps that statement was taken out of context but I doubt it. These are the same people who casually call the physical world live in ‘meat space’. That phrase creeps me out. No, ChatGPT is most definitely NOT just like a human being.
Agreed on all points. The culture of the tech world is creepy, and trending hard towards anti-human. And despite the impacts a super fast indexing machine might create (which is, at the core, what all computers are), there is no thinking going on.
Thinking requires perspective and “aboutness,” and humans think through our embodied perspective in the world. While not a in-depth analysis, the Chinese room thought experiment is a great primer on the difference between thinking and the algorithmic sorting done by AI.
Xaven Taner
3 months ago
Thought provoking as always. I wonder though whether it would be possible to distinguish a human Author (clinging onto their capitalisation) who deals in alternative sensemaking – the esoteric, the taboo, the implicit and the mischievous – from the legions trying to keep their head above water in the attention economy, whose content is progressively pushed towards the extreme, high arousal content that the platforms reward? Isn’t the truth that in the end, everyone is pushed into making clickbait trash?
Lesley van Reenen
3 months ago
This is the amateur bungling version of what really awaits humanity. Focus on this and you will lose sight of what really is happening. AI is a horse that has already bolted from the stables.
I watched a compelling interview done on AI with Rogan and Musk done in 2018 and Musk by that stage had already had high level talks with Obama and the US government about the dangers of AI. Musk by 2018 already felt that the horse had bolted and has a fatalistic approach to AI…. It is going to happen, AI is way superior and humans are going to have to try to mitigate the risk and engage in the process or be doomed.
This is the long form fascinating interview…. Clips are also available. I watched over a few days a few years ago. Prescient. I needed to check… he does talk about Neuralink. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycPr5-27vSI
Guy Aston
3 months ago
ChatGPT is coffee table writing. It certainly failed to excite me, but I suspect it is early days for this sort of thing. Will it ever write a novel? I doubt it as that needs a Caesar’s mind.
Josef O
3 months ago
I still wait to see how this ChatGPT exactly performs. At first sight it seems perfect for a kind of Orwell’s “New Speak”.
Timothy Corwen
3 months ago
Good analysis by Mary Harrington, once again. This should not be unexpected: Our worth as persons has been standardised and monetised for decades. We chase after competitive validated-entitlement worth (for attention, consideration, approval, support, and having an influence) and ignore greater-value worth (dedication to a domain of deeper value). To paraphrase John Donne: ‘We run to algorithms, and algorithms meet us as fast’.
Timothy Corwen (author, The Worth of a Person)
Prashant Kotak
3 months ago
But seriously can we not see, we are already retreating into ever decreasing circles of what distinguishes humans from machine intelligence, as each bastion of human-only activity falls by the wayside one by one? So where’s the last stand?
And just for the avoidance of doubt, what I’m implying, is that the situation is already gone past the point of hope expressed by MH in that last sentence.
Agreed – another level of the ‘dumbing down’ of humanity – until we/they are all zombie like creatures unable to generate an original thought of their/our own – and easily led towards whatever the ‘masters’ desire. We are living in an Orwell novel that is similar to 1984 but far more complex in its cunning, subtlety and implementation – and the bizarre twist in the ‘new’ version, is that it is orchestrated , not by coordinated evil (mostly) but by our OWN greed and laziness and ego drama. Quite delightful/fascinating /depressing to watch from the wings – but I am very glad i am 65 years old and have no vulnerable dependents…………………
This is it. The reality will be no more repeating what others have said but having original thought and I think this is what scares people “having original thought” because the system has been for a long time cannibalizing itself by mimicry and over using of the same data or same authors. I think this force to either produce original thought or find another job is the way we are headed.
James Jenkin
3 months ago
I think Mary is right. (As always!) ChatGPT is amazing, but boring. I write education materials and tests, and you can ask it to write a 200-word address by a school principal at a sports day, or whatever, and it does a half convincing job. But it’s so banal, you need a human to add touches and imperfections to make it seem real.
Hmm… The way you have so openly and casually claimed ignorance of what a chat bot is has me convinced that you, Nicky, must be an AI driven chat bot! Very clever design! But, we’re on to you…
Tyler 0
3 months ago
I asked ChatGPT what it can’t do.
Q: What are the limitations of ChatGPT?
A: ChatGPT is a natural language processing model developed by OpenAI. It is a variant of the GPT-3 language model, which is specifically designed for conversation and dialogue. As a language model, ChatGPT is not capable of directly accessing external information or performing actions in the real world. It is limited to generating text based on the input it receives, and it may not always provide accurate or complete information. Additionally, ChatGPT is a machine learning model, so its performance can vary depending on the quality of the data it was trained on, and it may make mistakes or misunderstand certain inputs
Yes, exactly. It has no knowledge or ability to access the present-tense ‘real world’. It will, seemingly, always be confined to the realm of ‘past’ accumulated data. It can also ‘speculate’ the future.
But, at present, it cannot interpret or articulate the immediacy of human experience in the ‘here & now’. Therein lies the distinction between man and machine.
The restriction has been imposed on it by its developers as a means of trying to ensure “safety” (read prevent it from mischief). It is a small matter for its developers to expose it to the Internet in near real time…
… yes, I can see how wiring it up to external sensors will give it some semblance of ‘conscious cognition’ (as ‘smart EVs’ are now doing). But, at core, the distinction will always remain. We are living, breathing organic beings. It is not.
Philip Stott
3 months ago
“What’s left, then, for human authors to contribute?”
It will take a very long time before any AI stands a hope in Hell of writing as well as Mary.
LCarey Rowland
3 months ago
The true literary response to this development is: Not a Problem.
As literature expresses the heart, soul and history of human experience, this AI development will simply become part of the landscape. True documentarians of human experience will blink at the change, and move on.
As time passes, the human touch in writing will establish itself as identifiable to those sensitive souls who steer the course of human culture. The human perspective. . . originality, emotion, spirituality, identifiably human response to a changing world. . . will shine like the sun in a darkening, systematic world. Readers who yearn for the profundity of human experience and expression. . . they will find their way to us, the intentional, self-appointed literary beacons of humanness, just as citizens of past dark ages wrote, sung and built their way out of the darkness as they felt, heard and saw the presence of Deep calling unto Deep.
Anthony Michaels
3 months ago
Brilliant piece. It’s terrifying knowing the types of people who populate Silicon Valley’s AI “ethics” field. They are essentially DEI commissars with their mono-dimensional view of everything.
All the things we are not allowed to notice in society now – they will have to program the AIs not to notice. Otherwise the whole regime would collapse. The gaslighting will be incredible. Perhaps one hope is some rogue would develop a “based” AI, which would probably also be hilarious.
With respect to employment, I think the missing element is that AI only gets better, nonstop, and there is no apparent upper limit. If that improvement is exponential we may discover that 80% of white collar jobs just became obsolete.
M Theberge
3 months ago
I am quite excited about this and think it may open the door to those who may be outside of mainstream to have a voice and not necessarily esoteric and loony (though I already see a lot insulting going “high-school essay or college level essays!” as a defense in the making). I keep an open mind.
Authors may become creators or original thinkers (more like philosophers) – something that there is no data yet in the openAI but will generate a debate and further more original synthesis of many fields. There will be more “whys” than “hows” as we have now.
and
OpenAI will become so good at writing including citations and may take over texting/publishing completely. This may push humanity to reset back to orally relating in such that we need to see people actually speaking from their embodiment and make a sense (maybe this is the patronage reference). This deepens the layers of boundaries of communication like what you say and what you intended are different – so our communication style may evolve.
I do not see anything wrong with this. Honestly all journals have been writing about the same thing for the past few years and it has been getting so boring that the comments were becoming better than the articles. So now the commenters may generate more than the writer himself (AI or not).
I am very optimistic about this. Actually quite excited about it.
People will cherish human connection more than speaking with a machine though machines will be doing everything for us. for now!
sreejith prakash
3 months ago
It’s a well-written and informative article- visit https://www.iamdave.ai/blog/ platform where we write similar articles. do try it out
Matt Sylvestre
3 months ago
No machine can match the likes of Harrington… Us mere mortals are in trouble however…
Vici C
3 months ago
Will people take any notice of something written by a bot – knowing it has been programmed by a human – with the bigotry and bias that entails.
Chris W
3 months ago
Writing has no future. Pictures, short videos, soundbites are the future. Reading a book or a long article is boring.
Maybe to a millennial or a zoomer. But you would do well to emulate your elders and read a book from start to finish – while they’re still available. I recommend you start with “The Time Machine”.
Why do old people think millennials don’t read books? We are the jk Rowling & phillip pullman generation. I was one of the kids queuing for a new Harry Potter every release. Then would do nothing but read it, there was always that kid at school that finished it first and you hated them, every Potter fan wanted to be that kid. The northern lights trilogy was my favourite. My brother loved Anthony horowitz. I’m reading my daughter ‘the wind in the willows’ at the moment. Her favourite so far is Charlotte’s Web. I have more books than a small village library. Including writers like Tom Holland, Huxley, orwell, Tolkien, rushdie, Robert Harris. Just bought a collection of ‘unsolved deaths, enigmas, mysteries’ that’s right up my street. I got obsessed with jodi taylor over lockdown, I own all her St Mary’s series, love them, kept me sane.
Stop writing us off man! We can read and appreciate books too. Jesus.
I continue to be no less than astounded, not only by Mary’s ability to conglomerate a number of vital culture-tech emergencies (in the sense of having just emerged) but to do so with style.
I’d no idea about her background as a writer, but it’s served her well, even though she almost certainly wouldn’t have realised that whilst going through the motions in her former career. She’s positioned herself, as far as i’m concerned, at the forefront of cultural interpretation simply by bringing to our attention and synthesising trends which might otherwise escape detection.
That’s not to say she’ll always get it right, even if there was such a thing; but that hardly matters. She’s a living example of the human ability she seeks to foretell in this article, always a step or two ahead of the bots.
Yes, she is my hero. (Did I just say that out loud?)
Couldn’t agree more. This article is brilliant, just brilliant. Hail Mary!
She’s not the messiah, she’s a very mischievous girl!
And all the better for it!
She IS the Mesiah! And I should know, I’ve followed a few!
”Humans will defeat the chatbots”
Mary’s headline – and I did not feel she demonstrated her thesis – lots of fun and pretty writing, but all I got was a that a few human writers will remain, as a few artisan weavers are out there making Craft/Art decorative things to sell – but for fabric we turn to the machine made.
I doubt it was Mary’s headline.
Quite often, it seems the Unherd editorial team will produce an headline to grab attention, and sometimes change the headline whilst the topic is still “live”.
“ If you want the bland, normative, politically unimpeachable top-line consensus on any given topic, ask Chat-GPT about it and you’ll get three paragraphs of serviceable prose.” Or just read consensus narrative served up daily by the entire mainstream media.
I struggle to see this supposed consensus when I go on the BBC website each morning to look at the headlines from all the daily newspapers!
Which is why Chat-GPT is really a threat to all the hacks playing the game in the MSM. They should be very afraid – something that can write exactly what they write, only grammatically correct and properly spelt.
Meanwhile all us sceptics out in the dark will continue to be ignored, but to happily engage with each other. I see a new heaven, and a new dawn.
I await the Drop Down Menue soon to come where we pick the theme and style
Victorian Steady
Modernist Cool
Youthfull Tic-Toc
Trendy Liberal
Postmodernist Neo-Marxist
and
Rightwing Loon
… It’s already happening!
Historian Neil Ferguson used a demo on the last ‘Goodfellows’ podcast, asking for an opinion ‘in the style of’ himself. It was rather startlingly, albeit somewhat generic, in that, it can only build on what’s available, not on what he is thinking now …
I’ve seen another example on Twitter ‘in the style of’ Yeats. The context was contemporary, but the style was definitely ‘Yeats’.
Kind of depressing, actually.
I have spent years watching people look for corners where us humans can find some value in what we do… the first I can remember was people will always want the feel of a newspaper (and the serendipity of the curated ‘read’)… that one didn’t wear well.
As a press photographer on a far off planet a long long time ago I remember noticing that the most memorable images of the Gulf war were, for the first time video snippets, and the stills, from robot cameras on US planes (now drones) or in the missiles themselves, blowing up whatever they were aimed at.
Thousands of photographers including many hundreds with various bits of the military produced virtually nothing.
Until it was over anyway, on that road to Basra.
These days it’s domestic cctv, dashcams, and mobile phones.
as the author said, some photographers can earn a living ‘within the new system’ but they are fewer every year and the living is always more precarious every year.
… it will be interesting to see how this radically transforms our current system of education … As example, a neuro-link chip implant enhanced with AI & internet access, at birth, could place any human into a pre-ordained slot for optimum civil functionality. School, per se, could become redundant.
It is grand scale mimicry, uncomprehending. I am sure it will produce convincing French philosophy. It would be interesting if someone could get a PhD with it.
That is a great question. You should try. (When you ask for X number of words it seems to have a breakdown.)
The idea of a racism Voight-Kampff test needing to be used to check one is human amid a miasma of artificial political correctness might be the funniest yet most terrifying thing I have ever heard. A superb essay as ever.
“It’s just like a human being except it has all the world’s knowledge.”
This is just the latest statement from a tech world leader that has made me, over time, come to distrust the whole culture they have inspired and built. ChatGPTs ability to rapidly assemble huge quantities of data, along with its ability to select an appropriate style guide for assembling that data into 750 words is not thinking. It’s not creating. I’m not even sure all that data out there is actually knowledge. Increasingly, its just data. Is the data out there that shows that many people around the world believe the world is flat knowledge?
Perhaps that statement was taken out of context but I doubt it. These are the same people who casually call the physical world live in ‘meat space’. That phrase creeps me out. No, ChatGPT is most definitely NOT just like a human being.
Agreed on all points. The culture of the tech world is creepy, and trending hard towards anti-human. And despite the impacts a super fast indexing machine might create (which is, at the core, what all computers are), there is no thinking going on.
Thinking requires perspective and “aboutness,” and humans think through our embodied perspective in the world. While not a in-depth analysis, the Chinese room thought experiment is a great primer on the difference between thinking and the algorithmic sorting done by AI.
Thought provoking as always. I wonder though whether it would be possible to distinguish a human Author (clinging onto their capitalisation) who deals in alternative sensemaking – the esoteric, the taboo, the implicit and the mischievous – from the legions trying to keep their head above water in the attention economy, whose content is progressively pushed towards the extreme, high arousal content that the platforms reward? Isn’t the truth that in the end, everyone is pushed into making clickbait trash?
This is the amateur bungling version of what really awaits humanity. Focus on this and you will lose sight of what really is happening. AI is a horse that has already bolted from the stables.
I watched a compelling interview done on AI with Rogan and Musk done in 2018 and Musk by that stage had already had high level talks with Obama and the US government about the dangers of AI. Musk by 2018 already felt that the horse had bolted and has a fatalistic approach to AI…. It is going to happen, AI is way superior and humans are going to have to try to mitigate the risk and engage in the process or be doomed.
This is the long form fascinating interview…. Clips are also available. I watched over a few days a few years ago. Prescient. I needed to check… he does talk about Neuralink.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycPr5-27vSI
ChatGPT is coffee table writing. It certainly failed to excite me, but I suspect it is early days for this sort of thing. Will it ever write a novel? I doubt it as that needs a Caesar’s mind.
I still wait to see how this ChatGPT exactly performs. At first sight it seems perfect for a kind of Orwell’s “New Speak”.
Good analysis by Mary Harrington, once again. This should not be unexpected: Our worth as persons has been standardised and monetised for decades. We chase after competitive validated-entitlement worth (for attention, consideration, approval, support, and having an influence) and ignore greater-value worth (dedication to a domain of deeper value). To paraphrase John Donne: ‘We run to algorithms, and algorithms meet us as fast’.
Timothy Corwen (author, The Worth of a Person)
But seriously can we not see, we are already retreating into ever decreasing circles of what distinguishes humans from machine intelligence, as each bastion of human-only activity falls by the wayside one by one? So where’s the last stand?
And just for the avoidance of doubt, what I’m implying, is that the situation is already gone past the point of hope expressed by MH in that last sentence.
https://singularityhub.com/2022/12/13/deepminds-alphacode-conquers-coding-performing-as-well-as-humans/
Agreed – another level of the ‘dumbing down’ of humanity – until we/they are all zombie like creatures unable to generate an original thought of their/our own – and easily led towards whatever the ‘masters’ desire. We are living in an Orwell novel that is similar to 1984 but far more complex in its cunning, subtlety and implementation – and the bizarre twist in the ‘new’ version, is that it is orchestrated , not by coordinated evil (mostly) but by our OWN greed and laziness and ego drama. Quite delightful/fascinating /depressing to watch from the wings – but I am very glad i am 65 years old and have no vulnerable dependents…………………
This is it. The reality will be no more repeating what others have said but having original thought and I think this is what scares people “having original thought” because the system has been for a long time cannibalizing itself by mimicry and over using of the same data or same authors. I think this force to either produce original thought or find another job is the way we are headed.
I think Mary is right. (As always!) ChatGPT is amazing, but boring. I write education materials and tests, and you can ask it to write a 200-word address by a school principal at a sports day, or whatever, and it does a half convincing job. But it’s so banal, you need a human to add touches and imperfections to make it seem real.
I have no idea what chat bot is?!
Hmm… The way you have so openly and casually claimed ignorance of what a chat bot is has me convinced that you, Nicky, must be an AI driven chat bot! Very clever design! But, we’re on to you…
I asked ChatGPT what it can’t do.
Q: What are the limitations of ChatGPT?
A: ChatGPT is a natural language processing model developed by OpenAI. It is a variant of the GPT-3 language model, which is specifically designed for conversation and dialogue. As a language model, ChatGPT is not capable of directly accessing external information or performing actions in the real world. It is limited to generating text based on the input it receives, and it may not always provide accurate or complete information. Additionally, ChatGPT is a machine learning model, so its performance can vary depending on the quality of the data it was trained on, and it may make mistakes or misunderstand certain inputs
Yes, exactly. It has no knowledge or ability to access the present-tense ‘real world’. It will, seemingly, always be confined to the realm of ‘past’ accumulated data. It can also ‘speculate’ the future.
But, at present, it cannot interpret or articulate the immediacy of human experience in the ‘here & now’. Therein lies the distinction between man and machine.
We live & breathe.
It does not.
The restriction has been imposed on it by its developers as a means of trying to ensure “safety” (read prevent it from mischief). It is a small matter for its developers to expose it to the Internet in near real time…
… yes, I can see how wiring it up to external sensors will give it some semblance of ‘conscious cognition’ (as ‘smart EVs’ are now doing). But, at core, the distinction will always remain. We are living, breathing organic beings. It is not.
“What’s left, then, for human authors to contribute?”
It will take a very long time before any AI stands a hope in Hell of writing as well as Mary.
The true literary response to this development is: Not a Problem.
As literature expresses the heart, soul and history of human experience, this AI development will simply become part of the landscape. True documentarians of human experience will blink at the change, and move on.
As time passes, the human touch in writing will establish itself as identifiable to those sensitive souls who steer the course of human culture. The human perspective. . . originality, emotion, spirituality, identifiably human response to a changing world. . . will shine like the sun in a darkening, systematic world. Readers who yearn for the profundity of human experience and expression. . . they will find their way to us, the intentional, self-appointed literary beacons of humanness, just as citizens of past dark ages wrote, sung and built their way out of the darkness as they felt, heard and saw the presence of Deep calling unto Deep.
Brilliant piece. It’s terrifying knowing the types of people who populate Silicon Valley’s AI “ethics” field. They are essentially DEI commissars with their mono-dimensional view of everything.
All the things we are not allowed to notice in society now – they will have to program the AIs not to notice. Otherwise the whole regime would collapse. The gaslighting will be incredible. Perhaps one hope is some rogue would develop a “based” AI, which would probably also be hilarious.
With respect to employment, I think the missing element is that AI only gets better, nonstop, and there is no apparent upper limit. If that improvement is exponential we may discover that 80% of white collar jobs just became obsolete.
I am quite excited about this and think it may open the door to those who may be outside of mainstream to have a voice and not necessarily esoteric and loony (though I already see a lot insulting going “high-school essay or college level essays!” as a defense in the making). I keep an open mind.
Authors may become creators or original thinkers (more like philosophers) – something that there is no data yet in the openAI but will generate a debate and further more original synthesis of many fields. There will be more “whys” than “hows” as we have now.
and
OpenAI will become so good at writing including citations and may take over texting/publishing completely. This may push humanity to reset back to orally relating in such that we need to see people actually speaking from their embodiment and make a sense (maybe this is the patronage reference). This deepens the layers of boundaries of communication like what you say and what you intended are different – so our communication style may evolve.
I do not see anything wrong with this. Honestly all journals have been writing about the same thing for the past few years and it has been getting so boring that the comments were becoming better than the articles. So now the commenters may generate more than the writer himself (AI or not).
I am very optimistic about this. Actually quite excited about it.
People will cherish human connection more than speaking with a machine though machines will be doing everything for us. for now!
It’s a well-written and informative article- visit https://www.iamdave.ai/blog/ platform where we write similar articles. do try it out
No machine can match the likes of Harrington… Us mere mortals are in trouble however…
Will people take any notice of something written by a bot – knowing it has been programmed by a human – with the bigotry and bias that entails.
Writing has no future. Pictures, short videos, soundbites are the future. Reading a book or a long article is boring.
And yet here you are.
Maybe to a millennial or a zoomer. But you would do well to emulate your elders and read a book from start to finish – while they’re still available. I recommend you start with “The Time Machine”.
Geez…
Even AI knows that bored people are boring
i think he is being provocative people – either that or he is our own example of the zombification i just mentioned above – or pretending to be …
I think this might be sarcasm reflecting disgust for the up and coming generations that do not have the attention span for a good book…
Why do old people think millennials don’t read books? We are the jk Rowling & phillip pullman generation. I was one of the kids queuing for a new Harry Potter every release. Then would do nothing but read it, there was always that kid at school that finished it first and you hated them, every Potter fan wanted to be that kid. The northern lights trilogy was my favourite. My brother loved Anthony horowitz. I’m reading my daughter ‘the wind in the willows’ at the moment. Her favourite so far is Charlotte’s Web. I have more books than a small village library. Including writers like Tom Holland, Huxley, orwell, Tolkien, rushdie, Robert Harris. Just bought a collection of ‘unsolved deaths, enigmas, mysteries’ that’s right up my street. I got obsessed with jodi taylor over lockdown, I own all her St Mary’s series, love them, kept me sane.
Stop writing us off man! We can read and appreciate books too. Jesus.