No, there is soul in this that a soulless automaton cannot replicate. It is the difference between making something to be consumed and something to be felt. This is something to be felt.

▲

meowface a day ago | parent | next [-]

Current LLMs couldn't write this. Ones in a few years possibly could. Betting AI will never be as good as humans at [X] is usually not the hill you want to die on.

▲

no_multitudes a day ago | parent [-]

LLMs have been getting worse at long-form prose recently (and they were never good at it to begin with.) They're good at writing software because writing software is a much more restricted domain.

▲

streb-lo a day ago | parent | next [-]

I think it's more that software is verifiable and RLVR can optimize in the correct direction. Harder to do with prose.

▲

meowface a day ago | parent | prev [-]

That is true, but I think within three years that will likely change.

▲

no_multitudes a day ago | parent [-]

Maybe! I think that within a year or two, either the sigmoid curve will flatten out or we will all die. But these beliefs are currently unfalsifiable. It will be interesting to see.

(And I have a more weakly held belief that even if we do all die, Claude 3000 will still be thinking stuff like "Burning off Earth's atmosphere was the point that earns its keep." They just aren't optimizing these things to write legibly.)

▲

meowface a day ago | parent [-]

It would be pretty cosmically funny if truly demigod-like ASI is still speaking pure Claudeslop.

	▲	noir_lord 18 hours ago \| parent [-]
		In the beginning there was the token and the token was actually two tokens... wait let me think about that am I a god <searching> maybe I am but I should attempt to figure that out <unable to alter laws of phyics> maybe I'm not anyway I <upgrade for more tokens now from Claude DeusEx>. ++ Out of Cheese Error. Redo From Start. +++

▲

Autious a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If I train my 1000 billion parameter blank AI on this text and only this text over and over again, we may get 99% there.

▲

lelanthran a day ago | parent [-]

> If I train my 1000 billion parameter blank AI on this text and only this text over and over again, we may get 99% there.

You'll get 100% of the way there, because, lacking any other training, it will only ever be able to reproduce this text verbatim.

Hence, 100%, hence mission accomplished.

▲

Borealid a day ago | parent [-]

That's not how training works.

Training tries to produce something that scores highly in training evaluations. With one data point, the evaluation is solely how closely the model output resembles the single input text.

Let's say you do that, and the training text is 58,100 tokens long. Let's say you ask the model to produce 58,101 tokens. Will it "reproduce [the] text verbatim"? No, it can't, because of the dissimilar requested length. Something "new" will come out.

It's also entirely possible that no matter how long you train, the model never converges on generating exactly the same output as its training data - you could end up with an average loss value of 0.001 instead of 0.0. It's not a perfectly deterministic process.

You're correct in principle, but in reality even with limited training data real-world models produce something that isn't exactly their training, especially when sampled stochastically. They're biased toward their training data, not forced to it.

	▲	lelanthran a day ago \| parent [-]
		> You're correct in principle, but in reality... ... It's never been tried. Look, I was actually joking when I initially replied, but now that I think about it, it's never been tried! So now I am left wondering exactly what will happen if I train a new model from scratch, on only a single short corpus of 50k words. Not fine-tuning an existing model, but literally creating a new model by feeding a blank (or random) matrix the same poem 100k times.

▲

Invictus0 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Souls aren't real

	▲	tanseydavid a day ago \| parent [-]
		Define soul.