×
all 102 comments

[–]RulerFrank 90 points91 points  (3 children)

"Can I go live with you?" I say.

"What?" he says.

"Can I live with you?"

"Why would you want to do that?"

"You understand me."

"Yes, but I'm the devil. I understand everyone."

Call me an idiot, but this part struck me as kinda deep.

[–]moridinamael 30 points31 points  (2 children)

The last line in particular was so good that I had to Google and see if it existed elsewhere. It doesn't.

[–]Lorvile 12 points13 points  (0 children)

From Death: The Time of Your Life:

HAZEL: Um. I love you.
DEATH: Thank you, Hazel. I love you too.
HAZEL: Yeah, but you love everyone.
DEATH: I know.

[–]RulerFrank 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Originally, I was gonna write a long and pretentious effortpost, analyzing that line in the context of John Milton’s Paradise Lost. Then I realized I was being quite dumb, and that I probably shouldn’t be reading too much into why the “author” decided to make the curtains blue. Or I guess in this case, why the curtains are #0000ff.

[–]aqouta 35 points36 points  (1 child)

with a few touch ups you could convince me both of these were real.

[–]summerstay[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

That's how I felt.

[–]icelandicghost 18 points19 points  (4 children)

I noticed an incongruence here:

They bring me platters of bacon and ham and turkey and roast beef and chicken and fish.

"No," I say. "This is all wrong."

"What?" they say.

"It's all wrong," I say. "The chicken's bones aren't right."

"What do you mean?"

"They're all the wrong shape. And the fish are all the wrong color. And look at this turkey! It's a turkey. Turkeys aren't blue. And look at this ham! Ham isn't green. Where's the beef?"

"There isn't any beef," they say.

"There isn't?" I say.

"No, dear. There isn't."

This does not seem like the kind of mistake that a human author would make. Another thing was weird use of the word "chrysalis" (presumably used to refer to the city). The story itself was also kind of incoherent:

  1. Angel is given some food with the wrong color.
  2. Angel inexplicably accuses food providers of "not understanding" it (what do they not understand?), the accused agree.
  3. Angel decides to fly to hell instead and then eats the universe.

I wonder how many stories you need GPT-3 to generate on average before you get one with a coherent story that really looks like it could have been written by a human.

I do agree that some of the lines are brilliant.

[–]UncleWeyland 10 points11 points  (2 children)

I mean, humans write weird inconsistent and difficult to understand shit all the time. Ever tried Waiting for Godot? That shit reads like it was written by GPT-0.7

Or e.e. cummings' output which looks like ENIAC blew a vacuum tube and shat out a poem.

[–]professorgermresigned misanthrope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or e.e. cummings' output which looks like ENIAC blew a vacuum tube and shat out a poem.

The alternative ending to Asimov's Last Question?

[–]dpwiz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This! Reading all the recent botfiction I wonder what's the "mean tries to decent result" for those. I wouldn't be surprised that GPT3 beats GPT2 on MTTDR hands down, but that bar is quite low. I'm more interested in absolute value here: how many times one shall expect to hit "retry"? how many prompts need tweaking before the thing gets it?

[–]chimeric-oncoprotein 30 points31 points  (18 children)

The Pratchett one doesn't really feel right to me. GPT-3 seems to have a problem making it sound funny.

[–]Ye_Olde_Spellchecker 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Yeah it’s almost approaching poetry but just slightly “off,” like a bit too rigid or something. Maybe the next step would explore phrasing and rhythm.

Still pretty impressive either way. Last story reminds me of Italo Calvino’s Invisible Cities.

[–]WTFwhatthehell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesnt feel like his main stories but its definitely got the feel and pacing of the intro to some of his children's stories. Simple language and short sentences drawing a picture.

[–]happyCarbohydrates 17 points18 points  (2 children)

The Pratchett one doesn't feel like his general style, but it does seem to emulate how he wrote prologues and epilogues. In particular, it seemed similar to the prologue featuring Anghammarad in Going Postal.

[–]chimeric-oncoprotein 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's how he likes to describe things and introduce situations, but without the humor - which is Pratchett's big thing.

[–]The_Electress_Sophie 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was going to say exactly the same, right down to mentioning the same prologue.

[–]haukzi 9 points10 points  (2 children)

The first few lines have the same cadence as the introductions to many of the Discworld novels, just without the humor. Felt kind of uncanny to me.

[–]chimeric-oncoprotein 3 points4 points  (1 child)

Yeah, it's pretty close. But the humor is so central to Pratchett's writing style that the output sounds bland without it.

The phrasing and pace is very Pratchett, the overall output is not because it's not sufficiently amusing.

[–]haukzi 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Totally agree, his humorous writing style was unparalleled. Now I wonder how GPT3 would perform if it were to be conditioned over excerpts of Pratchetts books (and make new excerpts) in the manner that Gwern did with HPMOR. In that case it often picked up Eliezer/Quirrels character quite well.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (8 children)

I was pondering that last night. You could seed an AI with all of clive barker and stephen kings works and come out with a decent horror writer but humor? We dont even understand humor ourselves

So

You could feed it concept hierarchies with thousands of examples and a broken clock is right twice a day but I think an AI attempting incongruous juxtaposition would overshoot into silly / random penguin of d00m territory.

Still probably useful to have at a writers table for punchup but since the machine learning algo can't know if its actually produced a mirthful chuckle without hu.an input , this is one area where youd actually need it to be human level (until we have a more explanatory humor theory I suppose)

[–]Sinity 3 points4 points  (3 children)

We dont even understand humor ourselves

That doesn't mean AI can't learn it. Maybe GPT-3 isn't powerful enough; next one might be.

but since the machine learning algo can't know if its actually produced a mirthful chuckle without hu.an input

It doesn't need to. It's task is predicting rest of the text. If it's good enough, and you feed it a list of jokes, it's going to keep generating jokes - as if original author wrote them.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Yes but think it through , we. Humans. Dont know why wr laugh.

So you can program it for a buildup and a punchline and feed it all of norm macdonalds anti jokes and its still going to produce more trash than diamonds.

Again , reference the wiki on theory of comedy. Whats dunny about observational humor? What makes the thought of chris farley doing cartwheels shirtless smoking a cigar funny?

We dont have a comedy algorithm , at best you have some loose rules that only work sometimes , which get filtered through humans telling jokes to other humans (the bits that make comedy specials get honed on tours because what sounds funny on paper might not land , why?)

You need a workable , empirical sound (repeatable) theory of comedy before you can have a machine succesfully writing jokes , otherwise (as I stated already) at best you can create a "joke idea generator" which still needs to be filterd by man.

A story? 3 acts. Antagonist , protagonist. Plots? :

Overcoming the Monster. Rags to Riches. The Quest. Voyage and Return. Rebirth. Comedy. Tragedy.

Its mad libs , insert blank.

I think the only joke a machine can be expected to pull off over and over at this point is a pun.

[–]Sinity 1 point2 points  (1 child)

But... we don't program AI for writing horror either. We don't use any "horror algorithm". It learns it implicitly. All we're doing is coming up with a general architecture/algorithm, and throwing obscene amounts of data & compute at it.

We might not have a theory of comedy, but we recognize comedy. So the information is there, in the data. We can extract it at subconscious level.

Sufficiently powerful AI will just find the pattern. At this point, you only need to convince it to apply it.

GPT-3 might've even been good enough for some humor, but it's handicapped for this task in particular - because it doesn't know how the words are spelled. It doesn't take words themselves as an input, it takes an encoding to save space. So two similar-looking words might look to it like completely different words.

I think the only joke a machine can be expected to pull off over and over at this point is a pun.

Because of the issue explained above, it's particularly bad at puns unfortunately.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It learns it implicitly.

Ok fair. Wheres my comedy bot then? , its simplicity learning something that can be learned through rote and relation to structure, plot devices used over and over, speech patterns. Thats again, only vaguely true of comedy, it would miss much more often then it hit and brute forcing it with more CPU space might not improve that.

but we recognize comedy.

but that's why I was hypothesizing the AI would have to actually be human level or sentient for this to work, we "recognize" comedy, we, conscious beings with emotional states and shared biology. The machine learning algorithm is incapable of "experience"

Sufficiently powerful AI will just find the pattern.

pretty close to sentient i'd say.

again, whats funny about slapstick? why is Chris farley falling down funny but a little old lady falling down isn't funny? whats funny about the moth joke? - and that ones pretty important because doing an anti-joke and landing it on that level is genius level comedy skill

I think intonation / voice would be the easier part of a machine doing comedy, writing is the troublesome part. Plenty of writers rooms come up with stuff that seems funny on paper to a small group of people, becomes a skit and then flops.

How do we define what a "good ending" to a skit is? , we know it when we see it (after the fact) but "we" who created the skit (well not you and me but humans) thought it would be fine until it was performed on SNL, how is the machine learning algo supposed to improve on something we ourselves don't understand and yet do full time as a job?

whats funny about observational humor and why? , you could easily program it to avoid taboo topics but now you have a "comedy bot" that sucks at satire - well satire is important to humans, we need our court jesters.

machine learning algo will probably be good at deadpan, give it some mitch hedberg and steven wright and have at, but what about black comedy? again - you can tell it topics to avoid but wont that unnaturally impinge on its learning?

define wit : define wit in a way that you can just feed a machine Groucho Marx and oscar Wilde and come back with something worth hearing.

If you can't define humor, why is it funny, then a machine learning algorithm with a bunch of jokes thrown at it is just going to be a useful punchup bot.

[–]gazztrompleGPT-V for President 2024! 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Neural style transfer to make my bad jokes funny.

[–]WTFwhatthehell 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Gwern had some pretty good examples for humor.

Gpt3 can definitely do decent humor if properly primed.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ahh maybe i'm reading into it too much

[–]PaulBellow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It got kinda meta when I asked it to tell a joke. The human says FUNNY!

[–]gryffinp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It feels a little bit like some of Pratchett's introductory sequences, where he sketches out a scene or something that will be important later (the example that comes to mind is the opening of Making Money), except that where it ought to flow elegantly into the beginning of a narrative, instead it trails off a bit and starts sort of wandering around in circles.

[–]-Metacelsus-Attempting human transmutation 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Wow, these are quite impressive

[–]honoredb 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I would absolutely believe the Neil Gaiman story was written by him if I saw it unedited. His short fiction seems like a great area for GPT-3 emulation because the reader is often invited to fill in the gaps, to build the world behind the vignette, and AI-written text generally demands a lot of work from the reader to rationalize the leaps it's making. And of course the poetic tone means I'm tempted to read deep meaning into things like Satan calling the angel a chrysalis, rather than just see it as a mistake.

The Pratchett piece feels a lot like the cryptic intros to some of his novels. I'd be reading it expecting to see a section break, then a cut to simpler prose from a new point of view. And then later we'd find out the first section was, like, describing a discarded flashlight from the point of view of superintelligent bacteria living on it, or something.

[–]keanu4EvaAKitten 11 points12 points  (0 children)

"Yes, but I'm the devil. I understand everyone." very deep...

[–]Tidus_Gold 8 points9 points  (0 children)

"I'm not going to eat it, am I?"

"Eat it?" he says.

"It's just that I've never eaten anything so big before," I say.

"It is big, isn't it?" he says.

"Big," I say.

We eat the Universe.

Anyone else find this hilarious?

[–]Drachefly 17 points18 points  (2 children)

It certainly doesn't read like Pratchett, and the Gaiman is off on the edge of what he might write. It seems like GPT-3 has an easy time with setting an unsettling ambiance. I'm much more impressed by its writing the more down-to-earth pieces I've seen, like the fake news articles.

[–]summerstay[S] 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Part of what impressed me was that GPT-2 had great difficulty with the notion of resolution in fiction-- it started off okay, but it didn't seem to be able to bring a story to a close. But GPT-3 seems to have overcome that limitation for very short stories.

[–]Drachefly 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Good point! News articles are often somewhat disjointed, so they don't test it. A bit of down-to-earth fiction would test both resolution and being natural at the same time. I predict that would be harder. Maybe not enough harder that GPT-3 can't do it. Like, it might be harder to write Scalzi (exemplar of the 'new comprehensible' style)

[–]coldlimebars 8 points9 points  (0 children)

holy moly this is so cool...and intimidating

[–]rotflolx 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Are there any public compilations of GPT-3 outputs like this? The first story was interesting enough that if it were a human that wrote it, I'd look to find more of their work.

[–]FreesoulH 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Here is a good one, with some others on the same blogs and some quite interesting views on it : https://arr.am/2020/07/31/human-intelligence-an-ai-op-ed/

[–]rotflolx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks, I appreciate the link.

The more GPT-3 produced content I read, the more concerned I get that there really should be more awareness that some huge shift is about to occur.

There's a lot of stuff going on in the world right now.

[–]TheMadMapmaker 13 points14 points  (17 children)

sweats nervously Hahah, at least machines are still not able to ... okay I honestly am not sure what to complete with, I had to search google and get things like "invent a good joke" or "write a novel", but I don't think we're very far from those. I don't think it would be that much more work on top of GPT-3 to have it write a full, decent novel (with maybe some weird bits here and there).

Pretty creepy.

[–]summerstay[S] 18 points19 points  (16 children)

I've been particularly interested in how it handles humor. Here is some simulated Dave Barry:

**A few nice words about Death

by Dave Barry**

Few people talk much about death anymore. When you ask people how they're doing, they say: "fine." Or "good." Or "tired." Or "okay." As if death and taxes aren't the only two guarantees in life.

One reason for this lack of interest in death is that funeral homes have been trying to make funerals cheaper by eliminating all the fancy stuff like bright flower displays and blaring trumpets, which suggests to people who don't know any better that funerals are for royalty and/or Greek gods.

We need to get back to a time when funerals were celebrations of life! We should hold funerals in which the spirit of the deceased hovers above us in spirit, perhaps talking through a computer on wheels with X-ray vision! We need to let those out-of-work actors know they are still important to our society! We need to hold funerals at which someone leaps out from behind a curtain dressed as Death with a scythe and "guess who's coming to dinner?" eyebrows! We need people wearing headdresses made from recycled grocery bags! We need bagpipes! Death needs some panache! Have you noticed how dead fish are placed back into the sea with much more ceremony than dead people get when they are laid in their graves?

What we really need, I think, is for all of us to accept our own mortality. That's why I propose a new national holiday, National Get Used to Death Day, the purpose of which would be to give us a chance to prepare ourselves for the inevitable, which will happen to you, too. On that day, every citizen would be given a balsa-wood model of himself or herself. The citizen would spend the day with that balsa-wood version of him- or herself, learning to say good-bye in case it should ever be necessary. ("No! No! Don't pull the plug! I was just learning to work that brain!") It's the least we can do for ourselves.

I know I'm going to get grief for suggesting that a holiday be named after me (especially since it doesn't happen to be my birthday) but this is a serious problem that needs serious solutions and it needs them now!

Besides, what about other holidays that could use some more pizzazz? Mother's Day comes immediately to mind, because the flowers look so real. I bet the people who invented that are in marketing. Isn't it time we had some fun with Mother's Day instead of just saying: "Here's another vase of flowers!" ? We need a new Mothers' Day holiday in which, instead of picking out chocolates or flowers or calling from out of town like a visiting serial killer, you'd surprise Mom by secretly enlisting her in an all-girl marching band that will parade through town in red capes and tights, with death heads drawn on their faces. When they reach your house you'd jump out from behind a bush dressed as Death and say something like: "Guess who's coming to dinner?" You should have seen what happened when my mom found out she was going to be in a marching band! She started clapping her hands and saying: "What cute outfits they have!"

There is also much room for improvement on Thanksgiving. Don't get me wrong; I'm happy with Thanksgiving and I don't want it changed. My only wish is that people would think about death while they're feasting on turkey on Thursday. Think about how very thankful we should be at this Thanksgiving table! Just think about how thankful we should be while we're chewing! I can't stand these obliviots who sit there mechanically chewing their turkey while their minds are on football scores and Christmas shopping and how it's time to start decorating the tree.

It's true that things aren't as good now as they were in 1789, when Thanksgiving began. I don't know if you've ever been inside the turkey on Thanksgiving, but it's pretty crowded. And pretty smelly. And there's a lot of sad peeping going on, plus some gurgling. The situation is made worse by the cranberry sauce; because of its color, people think it is meant to be served cold, so it gets dumped inside the turkey before the drumsticks are attached. Even if there is any room left inside the turkey (which is doubtful), it's not exactly Disneyland in there.

So what I propose is that we spend some time thinking about death while we're at the dinner table. What I'm trying to say is that while you're chewing that turkey this Thanksgiving, try to visualize your own internal organs—or, if you're a vegetarian, visual the internal organs of a turkey. Visualize blood pouring out of them in geysers! How thankful you should be! If you have a family member at this table who might die in the next year or so, picture his or her body after death—or maybe after spending a few hours in a lab and being pieced together with tape. Maybe the brain will be torn out or replaced with a plastic one or one made from nuts and bolts like they use in cartoons; or maybe everything will be removed from the skull and replaced with straw so that the head will be light enough for balloon strings to hold it up! That's how thankful you should be!

And maybe, while we're at it, we should think about war. And how grateful we should all be that we live in this country where we can say anything we want and nobody starts shooting at us—unless they're really annoyed by our political views and/or lack of dental flossing skills—and none of us will have to go over there and get killed in that stupid war because everyone will just understand that it would be ridiculous for us to kill other Americans when we all have this wonderful thing called freedom! And even though wars do have a way of prolonging life, sometimes they also shorten it—especially when people start dropping bombs on innocent bystanders who weren't even aiming at them; and just because there are no bullets whizzing through the air doesn't mean there won't be lots of collateral damage!

[–]Zacharyhundley 16 points17 points  (0 children)

What I'm trying to say is that while you're chewing that turkey this Thanksgiving, try to visualize your own internal organs—or, if you're a vegetarian, visual the internal organs of a turkey.

Very impressive wit for a computer...

[–]oriscratch 14 points15 points  (1 child)

And how grateful we should all be that we live in this country where we can say anything we want and nobody starts shooting at us—unless they're really annoyed by our political views and/or lack of dental flossing skills—

Hmm, there seems to be a hint of an actual joke here.

I find this way more impressive than the two samples in the original post (which were already quite good). The idea of "celebrating death" actually sounds like an interesting and original idea, if a bit disturbing.

[–]summerstay[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think that it has a good grasp of irony, and can use it for humorous effect. Interestingly, it doesn't really get puns, because it doesn't know how words sound, so it usually messes them up.

[–]JustLookingToHelp180 LSAT but not accomplishing much yet 8 points9 points  (0 children)

"No! No! Don't pull the plug! I was just learning to work that brain!"

This appears to be original?

It's... very good.

calling from out of town like a visiting serial killer

This as well? Um? These phrases are making me think.

[–]GavinNH 9 points10 points  (0 children)

That's why I propose a new national holiday, National Get Used to Death Day

That's a quality bit of content. This is really close to good enough quality to be a writer, if there were a good editor to fix the parts that don't quite fit.

[–]TheMadMapmaker 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That piece had me chuckling in a couple places.

(Gwern has more ... not quite there yet, but getting pretty dang close!)

[–]Sinity 3 points4 points  (1 child)

We should hold funerals in which the spirit of the deceased hovers above us in spirit, perhaps talking through a computer on wheels with X-ray vision!

I wonder what happened there. Is it perhaps trying to argue for accepting death, but in a world with brain uploading?

We need to let those out-of-work actors know they are still important to our society!

Is it humorously calling dead actors "out-of-work"? And referencing using them via DeepFake-like NNs in movies?

We need to hold funerals at which someone leaps out from behind a curtain dressed as Death with a scythe and "guess who's coming to dinner?"

That felt almost-like-a-joke, and suddenly few sentences later...

When they reach your house you'd jump out from behind a bush dressed as Death and say something like: "Guess who's coming to dinner?"

Interesting how coherent it really is. I suppose it wasn't anywhere close to context-window worth of distance so it's no surprise it considers previous use of that phrase, but somehow on AI Dungeon it never seems this coherent.

And how grateful we should all be that we live in this country where we can say anything we want and nobody starts shooting at us—unless they're really annoyed by our political views and/or lack of dental flossing skills

That seems like a genuine, perhaps a bit dark, humor.

[–]manowarp 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My guess on the actors bit is that it connected professional mourners, who are paid to attend funerals and either commiserate with or entertain the guests, with the concept of actors. The out of work part impresses me most. Makes me wonder whether it gleaned an observation from recent texts that many actors are out of work right now. Or maybe it's a reflection that professional mourners are not often found in the English-speaking societies that provided the texts it's processed. Or it could be pulled from news about writers / actors strikes in the near-past.

[–]The_Electress_Sophie 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is so interesting - I wouldn't say it succeeds at being funny, but you can tell that's what it's going for. I feel like the skeleton of a decent humour column is buried in here, but at the moment it's mostly lost under disjointed rambling that's random rather than actually funny ('penguin of d00m territory', as another poster says). Given that I couldn't even begin to explain what makes funny things funny, and I'm not convinced most people who write humour professionally could either, it's fascinating that it's even managed to get that far.

[–]withmymindsheruns 2 points3 points  (2 children)

How the fuck does this work?

I just learned something from that text. This is really disturbing.

[–]summerstay[S] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I think the perfect word for it is "uncanny" -- in the sense Freud used, when he discussed wax mannequins and automata. It's so human, and yet not quite.

[–]withmymindsheruns 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah, i think you put your finger on it.

[–]benjaminfinn 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It's impressive but it doesn't quite seem to get humour. Mostly bizarre or unfunny - though to be fair, quite a bit of it is no worse than some wannabe or third-rate standups I've heard who say things that are obviously meant to be jokes but are just lame. Or what an ordinary person might produce if you asked them to write humour. And some parts would certainly get a laugh from some people.

Remember that expectations of humour are very high these days - TV comedians & sitcoms are the world's finest. Much humour from before say the 1970s is lame, in part because it's dated, but also I suspect because standards & expectations were much lower.

[–]The_Electress_Sophie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

quite a bit of it is no worse than some wannabe or third-rate standups

A lot of standups work on their material by trying it out in clubs and gauging audience reactions before they go on tour or on TV or whatever. I wonder if GPT's comedy would improve if it could get feedback in a similar way - by some form of audience rating mechanism, or even by pairing up with another AI that was able to analyse facial expressions.

[–]ponycomplete-gpt-pi 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi, I'm a reporter for The Washington Post. If I'm reading this thread correctly, you've just gotten a computer to invent the idea of a "National Get Used to Death Day". For humans.

What's a good number to contact you at for a phone interview?

[–]j15t 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is extremely impressive.

[–]cl31j6171e 7 points8 points  (10 children)

How does one acquire beta access to GPT3?

[–]summerstay[S] 4 points5 points  (9 children)

There's a web form you can fill out. Details here: https://openai.com/blog/openai-api/

[–]monfreremonfrere 4 points5 points  (7 children)

Are your chances diminished if you just say you want to play around?

[–]summerstay[S] 8 points9 points  (2 children)

I don't know. I provided them with a link to my github where I've been sharing programs I wrote that make use of GPT-2.

[–]gwern 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I've also brought up your rejection sampling GPT-2 work in the Slack on several occasions as well, which might've helped.

[–]summerstay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you! I really appreciate it. This is so fun to play with.

[–]partoffuturehivemind[the Seven Secular Sermons guy] 8 points9 points  (3 children)

I said I just wanted to play around and didn't mention any of my IT credentials and they never answered.

[–]MugaSofer 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Same.

[–]Sinity 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Me too unfortunately. Eh. It'd be nice if they at least provided some vague public release date.

[–]summerstay[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On the slack channel it sounded like they might announce something in a couple of months.

[–]MaxChaplin 4 points5 points  (1 child)

The first story looks like a take on Adam and Eve's story, except the protagonist is the maker of their own destiny throughout, not a plaything of higher forces. His (her?) caretakers in heaven only want to pamper him, but he's bothered by the artificiality of heaven's pleasures and his inability to grow and develop further ("They'll keep me here in this chrysalis until it rots, and I'll rot with it"). He thus flees from heaven (it's worth pointing out that in Hebrew, "Garden of Eden" refers to Heaven as well). He turns to Satan, who, like in the biblical story, offers understanding and liberation, but also seems like a surprisingly kind fellow. The last part of the story seems to be where the devil hands him the forbidden fruit, played here by the entire universe. This probably signifies that once he's out of the Garden of Eden, the protagonist can take on the world and fulfill his full potential.

The only think that somewhat baffles me is the two very last lines. They're back? Back to where?

[–]summerstay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not sure, but it did seem to echo the idea of cocoon = rebirth.

[–]beets_or_turnips 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Does GPT-3 include corpora by these two authors? Forgive me, I don't know much about how it works.

[–]summerstay[S] 10 points11 points  (1 child)

The corpus does include many of their works-- certainly anything you could find on the web, but also a large book corpus that we know little about (the paper doesn't give any details.)

[–]PaulBellow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I want to see a pure-fiction language model. Or GPT-3 fine-tuned on a gig or two of fiction. Would be interesting, I think.

[–]snowchugger52 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is the beginning of The End....

[–]l0c0dantes 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I'm not sure I particularly want AI literature directly aping other authors, let alone dead authors who can't say one way or another if they are ok with it.

[–]summerstay[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It would take pretty heavy-handed government regulation to prevent it, I think.

[–]l0c0dantes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yea, I see that. Still think it's in bad taste.

[–]mithfaroth 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Holy shit, how did it turn Pratchett's fun mood into this dark description?

[–]summerstay[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Pratchett can be dark-- when he's setting up a villain, for example. He wrote several books about Death. :) I don't think Pratchett ever kept up this tone through a whole book, though.

[–]mithfaroth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Actuallly, later on I realized precisely that: Pratchett is super dark... Even YA books (like Amazing Maurice) will often depict the worst in people; even ordinary people, even heroes (Death is never a villain, actually - a character with existential issues at most). They're always fighting their own dark side, e.g., Vimes & Maurice struggle with anger, Weatherwax struggles with pride, etc. But he balances that with a marvelous sense of humour and poignants examples of virtue, and that's something GPT-3 is lacking in that excerpt. In some sense, this text was even more revealling to me - it made me realize the boundaries of some sort of "Pratchett formula"

[–]Poiote 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The Pratchett one reads like a high pass filter applied to an actual Terry Pratchett novel. If I read only a couple of sentences, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference, but after those sentences it just creates more similar ones and the story never really goes anywhere.

I wonder if the "coherence length" of any GPT-3 produced text is just proportional to the size of the network. With a large enough network, we could get longer and longer "story arcs" in the text until we have at least a short story. Now the coherence length of the text seems to be about 3-5 sentences.

[–]summerstay[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When language models were called "Markov chains" you could only get a phrase or two before it wandered off. You can easily see how the various sizes of GPT-2 or 3 have longer and longer coherence as they get larger.

[–]KingShere 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Impressive, regarding the STP one, it lacks the footnotes, After thinking about those footnotes, it becomes much better. Some examples i fanmade up

There is a city beneath this city. §1-The above city is also confusingly called underland, Its ignorant builders were mostly preoccupied about the color/colour of roses, card fights and all manners of bugs (including the biting kind) to do a thorough survey

Most of it is under the ground, and most people don’t know it’s there. §2There where also records. One of the Key word here is missing. And also in that pile of missing keys, notes and records were the of conceptual art of a long now past "upcoming" attraction. Also missing is the archive copy of its certificate and other known evidence that would link The Underlands completion by a notorious landscape artist.

"Everything you might expect to find in an old forest"

§4 Except cats plural. There is however something that could qualify as not zero. This can be inferred from an ongoing postal debate about a misplaced box. Common statements in that debate is whether any inhabitant of the missing box has a big grin on its face. However confirmation of the real box actual location and content are at a standoff because of a prominent and irritated cat lover.

[–]kichelmoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm rereading my favorite discworld novels at the moment and these footnotes are really on point. Love it.

[–]mithfaroth 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I want to see the Pratchett one

[–]mathematics1 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It's in the post.

[–]mithfaroth 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really sorry.

[–]reallyeli 0 points1 point  (2 children)

These are really good! Can I ask what the selection pressure that's been applied to these is? Did you try a few out and post the best ones, or did you just say "I'm going to ask it for a Neil Gaiman + Terry Pratchett story" and post the results?

[–]summerstay[S] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

This was the first result for Gaiman and the second result for Pratchett. I tried a few other authors (Lord Dunsany, Poe) after I published this and while it got the style right, their stories didn't resolve.

[–]PaulBellow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very nice! Thanks for sharing.

[–]PaulBellow 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I tried it with poetry. Here's Tuesdays by Charles Bukowski. Kinda reads like him.

[–]PaulBellow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Chinaski also wrote fiction, so I tried prompting as such, but it went with poetry - for which he's more famous. Although, it pays more attention to caps and punctuation. I wonder if prompting a paragraph or two would switch it over...

[–]dontnormally 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I got access to the beta last night.

Can I ask what happened to get you from not having to having access? I can't help but think there's no way my application is going through without... something?

[–]martini-meow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

of possible interest, a bot that finds books on tape:

u/emotionalfield

[–]regalrecaller 0 points1 point  (6 children)

So you're posting these stories because they remind you of the beta?

[–]summerstay[S] 10 points11 points  (5 children)

I mean I have beta access to GPT-3, which generated these stories. If you're making a joke, I'm afraid it's gone over my head.

[–]fuboTell me whom thou frequent, I will tell you which you are. 10 points11 points  (3 children)

I took it for an ELIZA joke and couldn't decide whether to respond seriously or with a Hamilton reference, so I did both.

[–]Batman_AoD 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I thought it might be a Labyrinth reference ("what beta?" "the beta with the power!"), but ELIZA makes much more sense.

[–]PaulBellow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I remember impressing a girlfriend with the wonders of ELIZA back in the day. Haha.

[–]beets_or_turnips 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Maybe the joke is implying they were actually written by a human because they were so coherent. I agree it didn't quite land. Maybe the joke was written by an NLP AI in development.