35 Comments

I think I sit somewhere awkwardly between you and Joel. I would have made the perfect referee for your smackdown. I use AI in some fashion on a daily basis for work and experimentation, and I’m often delighted in the same way I’m delighted by a magic trick. But like a magic trick, the output of AI feels like empty calories. I think the reason I stay engaged with it is because it is evolving rapidly, and none of us can accurately predict what is possible. Right now it is a tool and an echo chamber of all the great ideas humans have produced, but I think it has the potential to be a looking glass for us to examine consciousness. Or not. 😜

Expand full comment
author

I am open to convincing... but thus far still unconvinced... (not for lack of Joel trying though 😅)

Expand full comment

Such a thought-provoking post! I love the 'Bleak House' references - you've taken me right back to A-level English Lit - goodness me, I had never resented 884 consecutive pages so much, either before or since.....! 🤣

Although I've been a subscriber to Life Litter for ages I have just had to re-subscribe myself twice in order to comment, even though I'm an existing subscriber - I rather think that yesterday's Substack outage might've given it a bit of a lingering headache! 🤣

Expand full comment
author

Oh no, that's rubbish, I'm sorry. Hope it's all sorted now. I am so close to finishing BH now, such a brilliant read. Want to watch the BBC series from 2005 but worried it will be disappointing... have you seen it?

Expand full comment

All sorted - thanks, Jill!

I would thoroughly recommend the series - it's terrific, but I'd finish reading the book first. You'll see a young Carey Mulligan, and Gillian Anderson is absolutely terrific as Lady Dedlock, ditto Johnny Vegas as Krook and Charles Dance as Tulkinghorn - well, let's just say it's brilliantly cast!

Expand full comment
author

Sold. It’s shot to the top of my watch list. I’m only fifty pages out from end, will finish today x

Expand full comment

It increasingly appears to be an artful tool. Think on this and shudder: scientists are learning ChatGPT is giving better answers when you tell it to answer as Captain Kirk and so forth.

That is not good, and I am not joking. We have no idea what we’re playing with.

Burn this after reading.

Expand full comment
author

But it makes perfect sense that ChatGPT can answer better as Captain Kirk than as ChatGPT! ChatGPT is a nothing – apart from what it's fed (eg. Captain Kirk)....

Expand full comment

I would get it sounding like Captain Kirk, doing an impression of him in some not entirely convincing way, but I wouldn't expect that the answers being given typically less accurate than it is capable of. Computers are supposed to be rigid and binary. That's how the ones till now are constructed, but this is introducing the idea of non-arbitrary responses. I mean wtf? I wouldn't call it will, but it's something concerning. Why are its answers not as intelligent as they could be? Fwiw, I've noticed the strength and accuracy of ChatGPT has gotten worse. I suspect that has more to do with how openai has had to re-engineer the system with massive numbers of users, but it sucks that it is getting worse. It also sucks that they think this lessening of quality might be in some way "seasonal affective disorder." No, it's all a Pandora's Box.

Expand full comment

I'm with you, Jill - *bleep bloop* 🤖

Expand full comment

Love this!

"But a tool performs a function — art is the extra. Hell, it’s right there in the name: exTRA." I agree 100% I also think art stems from not-knowing. Because ChatGPT has imbibed innumerable facts and plots and papers etc., it knows all and the "art" it spits out lacks that essential hole in the center.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

Art stems from not-knowing - YES. Trying to fill an unfillable hole and answer an unanswerable question.

Expand full comment

When you finish I'd love to discuss and compare views.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

You're on 🤝

Expand full comment

I don't get involved in other couples' fights, but I couldn't possibly spend more time than I do on the technical and philosophical issues involved in what they call "AI" and IMO you are correct. The cool thing is that time will tell; we don't have to persuade one another of anything!

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

❤️ thanks Mills. In the meantime, fwiw, delighted to be in the same philosophical corner as you.

Expand full comment

Good show. I don't know who is right on AI, but we'll probably find out in our lifetimes. I hope that you are right, and agree that there is no soul, no extra. It's still too easy to recognize the bland AI pictures, words and music. It's easy to mimic how we think- we're pretty stupid. Hard to mimic how we feel and the spark/soul that ignites us- we're pretty wild. Joel seems very smart, though, so I'm not betting against him.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

He is very smart and I love him very much. I think he’s wrong and he thinks I’m wrong and we are very, very different but what’s marital life without a little strife? ☺️ We usually bet a jump in the river on things we disagree about so I expect to go in the river when ChatGPT starts weeping to itself. Just last night he had to go in because he was adamant that Pierce Brosnan played the grocery store owner in Hot Fuzz (which he did NOT) 🌊

Expand full comment
Mar 6·edited Mar 6Liked by Jill

Indeed, no fun in agreeing all the time about everything. Ha! Here's to hoping that you stay dry when it comes to AI.

Expand full comment

I want to ask ChatGPT to generate a conversation on AI between Jill and Lauren Hough, but I'm concerned it might burn a wormhole in the space-time continuum.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

I wouldn’t even try to go toe-to-toe with Her Majesty (even as my AI-gen self). ❤️

Expand full comment

I am on your side regarding "AI" ... until it's self-aware it's just Google on steroids and should not be called AI.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

Google on steroids… exactly that. Rather draw my own conclusions about what I find on Google than have ChatGPT do a bland summary of the top 100 Google hits for me… (I know that’s not how it works but you know what I mean)

Expand full comment

Yes yes yes. Couldn't agree more

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

Thanks Meaghan 🤝

Expand full comment

Hi Jill,

Bleak House itself has a soul or at least it's part of Dickens' soul.

I want more awkward encounters! Life is boring without them.

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

😂 noted - and agreed re Bleak House, although I’m withholding judgment as only halfway through

Expand full comment

Very well put. It reminds me of the Young and Rubicam poster 'Computers Can't Cry'

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

Future ChatGPT iterations: “this one does” ?

Expand full comment

Fight the fight!

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

Fighting!!

Expand full comment

Hi Jill. I read somewhere that the creator of chat GPT said something along the lines of, people won't be that impressed with it once they discover that it's not very good.

As for AI generated art ...not for me, but maybe I'm a luddite 😆

Expand full comment
author
Mar 6Author

Luddite over here too, Rich 🤝

Expand full comment