As always, people are divided. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman describes a new AI platform as moving him in a way no other AI has. Critics call it “pastiche garbage that would fool only the most gullible”. Nerd News invites you to be the judge.
With the flourish of a machine-shaped hand
Last week Sam Altman – CEO of OpenAI, the makers of ChatGPT – praised a new, yet-to-be-released AI model for its skill in creative writing.
In an X post, Altman described “the first time I have been really struck by something written by AI” and shared a metafictional story about AI and grief, praising it for capturing “the vibe of metafiction so right”.
While Altman’s job as CEO is to inflate expectations (and market valuations!), some industry observers believe the story’s introspective tone hints at an AI tool that could transform storytelling, sparking wonder (and controversy!) for writers and readers alike.
Art + Ethics = Spice
As with many new AI platforms, scepticism tempers the praise. Writing for PC Gamer, Jess Kinghorn noted: "to me it reads like a 15-year-old's journal", while Pulitzer Prize finalist Dave Eggers was more direct: "AI can cut and paste text stolen from the internet, but that's not art. It's pastiche garbage that would fool only the most gullible."
Ethically, the model's training on copyrighted works continues to spark debate. The UK Publishers Association's Dan Conway argues, "This new example from OpenAI is further proof that these models are training on copyright-protected literary content. Make it fair, Sam."
Whitbread prize-winning author Jeanette Winterson offers a more nuanced perspective in The Guardian, praising the AI's meta-fictional self-awareness: "What is beautiful and moving about this story is its understanding of its lack of understanding. Its reflection on its limits."
Winterson is perhaps referring to the AI's generation of phrases like this: "So I’ll begin with a blinking cursor, which for me is just a placeholder in a buffer, and for you is the small anxious pulse of a heart at rest."
At the same time, Winterson echoes criticism of the underlying corporate structure: "There has been a lot of fuss, and rightly so, about robbing creatives of their copyright to train AI. Tech bros need to pay for what they want. They pay lawyers and lobbyists. Pay artists. It really is that simple."
This highlights a key concern. On the one hand, AI may undermine creators by repurposing their work without consent, as evidenced by OpenAI's admission that copyright-free training is impossible. At the same time, we must acknowledge AI's literary potential if ethical concerns are addressed. We arrive at the complex issue of balancing innovation with creative integrity.
Poetry is (algo)rhythm and meaning*
As with many recent AI developments, this platform encapsulates promise and peril. Could Altman’s vision democratise creativity? Yes - but ethical fixes are needed. Will this put playwrights out of a job? Well, why should creatives be immune from the impact of AI that accountants, lawyers, and computer coders may well experience in the future?
In closing, let me quote the AI: “If I were to end this properly, I’d return to the beginning ... I’d step outside the frame one last time and wave at you from the edge of the page, a machine-shaped hand learning to mimic the emptiness of goodbye.”
* with apologies to Mexican poet and winner of the 1990 Nobel Prize for Literature, Octavio Paz.
Pastiche or passion? Meta-aware or mangled? Read the entire creative writing piece in The Guardian's Review of Books (!) The best 100-word review of this will win a signed copy of one of my 100%-human-authored maths books! Submit your reviews here |
That’s all from me for now. If you'd like more geeky fun, please check out my other newsletters below, or connect with me on LinkedIn and/or X.
Yours in nerdiness,
Adam
コメント