 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Bert |
| | | | | | posted 7/23/2010 16:28 |   | | | | | | | | | Joe turned down the heat. The glow from the fake log seemed to die down.
The new kit was an easy bake oven toy for pig ears.
If Joe wasn’t so cool, I would think he was my foe. This was still better than being bogged down by books.
Sloppy AI Writing seems real. This one mimics an article found in Maxim.
| | |
| | |
squarebear |
| | | | | | posted 7/23/2010 18:01 | | | | | | | | | | This is the second nonsense topic you have posted. What are you trying to say?
| | |
| | |
hunt |
| | | | | | posted 7/23/2010 21:51 | | | | | | | | | | | |
Bert wrote @ 7/23/2010 4:28:00 PM:
Joe turned down the heat. The glow from the fake log seemed to die down.
The new kit was an easy bake oven toy for pig ears.
If Joe wasn’t so cool, I would think he was my foe. This was still better than being bogged down by books.
Sloppy AI Writing seems real. This one mimics an article found in Maxim.
| |
I think Bert is trying to imply that the first few lines of his post were written by a "Sloppy AI" program trying to mimic a Maxim article's style or content.
The problem, Bert, is that we, the members of this forum, are not involved in your project. You simply must include background to what you are working on to stimulate discussion, or else there is little point to posting.
1) What does your "Sloppy AI" program incorporate to generate the text you provided?
2) What about the methodology of this program makes the process "sloppy"?
3) What about the generated text makes it "seem real"? The fact that it is grammatically correct? The grammatical style mimics the article, even if the words chosen form nonsense?
You need to be more precise about the message you are trying to convey.
This is a problem on this forum that extends beyond Bert. I have no problem making an effort to understand posters for whom English is obviously not their first language. Grammatical and word choice issues are to be expected and I'll put in the effort to overcome them. The people I have a problem with are those who've obviously put little effort into framing their posts. Using incomplete sentences and vague ideas may seem sufficient to you, but your readers are not in your head. They do not have the same contextual basis and background you do. I feel abused when my time is wasted reading some half-formed thought that I'm putting more effort into understanding than they put into writing.
Sorry for the rant. But this is something I've been noticing for a while, and my irritation is mounting.
| | |
| | |
Bert |
| | | | | | posted 7/25/2010 00:27 | | | | | | | | | | The example was the distances 9 and 5.
If an A.I. is writing scripts, and the A.I. is based on simple math the absolute distance between two constants, then no matter what the A.I. writes the material will always seem true. Not only will it seem true, but if another A.I. writes scripts using the same method, then the method becomes reinforced and implanted on the reader or observer.
Thus, after this simple method of writing scripts goes on for several years, the A.I.’s will always produce a reality to the reader or observer. This means that this simple A.I. method copied it self onto the reader or observer. The A.I. becomes realer than reality.
If trauma or promotion enforces the relationship with the A.I., the A.I. can manufacture a sub-reality and/or dream (illness) in the reader or observer.
I can read certain articles and say that the skeleton of the article is this simple A.I.
| | |
| | |
Bert |
| | | | | | posted 7/25/2010 00:31 | | | | | | | | | | Sloppy means no real logical steps. There is no learning only generating.
However, real because it hurts or pleasures using the same words based on their distances.
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
