I'm not one to usually defend AI, but if I understand you correctly, humans also fail your criteria for being capable of creating original, innovative content. If you ask people the same question over and over again, I imagine the variability in the responses you'll get will be quite limited. Tell me if I'm misunderstanding your thought.

▲

markild 16 hours ago | parent | next [-]

While I do think that's true, I'd say a more apt analogy is that for humans each model will produce fairly similar results on each prompt, but it helps having 8 billion different models running.

I'd also argue that we tend to have a larger context. What did you have for dinner? Did you see anything new yesterday? Are you tired of getting asked the same question over and over again?

	▲	thw_9a83c 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> humans each model will produce fairly similar results on each prompt, but it helps having 8 billion different models running Yes, that was my point. We don't have 8 billion AI models. Furthermore, existing models are also trained on heavily overlapping data. The collective creativity and inventiveness of humans far exceeds what AI can currently do for us.

▲

throwbway37383 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You say you don't usually defend LLMs, and then give a defense of LLMs based on a giant misreading of what is absolutely standard human behaviour.

In my local library recently, they'd two boards in the lobby as you entered, one with all the drawings created by one class of ~7 year olds based on some book they read, and a second the same idea but the next class up on some other book. Both classes had apparently been asked to do a drawing that illustrated something they liked or thought about the book.

It was absolutely hilarious, and wild, and some genuinely exquisite ones. Some had writing, some didn't. Some had crazy absolutely nonsensical twists and turns in the writing, others more crazy art stuff going on. There were a few tropes that repeated in some of the lazier ones, but even those weren't all the same thing, the way LLM output consistently is, with few exceptions, if any.

And then there were a good number of the ones by the kids which were shockingly inventive, you'd be scratching your head going, geez, how did they come up with that. My partner and I stayed for 10 minutes, and kept noticing some new detail in another of them, and being amazed.

So the reality is the upside-down version of what you're saying.

I recognise that this is just an anecdote on the internet, but surely you know this to be true, variants on the experiment are done in classrooms around the world every day. So may I insist, that the work produced by children, at least, does not fit your odd view of human beings.

	▲	Antibabelic 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		LLMs and image generation models will also give crazy variable output when you give an open-ended prompt and increase temperature. However, we usually want high coherence and relevance, both from human and synthetic responses.