This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
We thought art would be the first to go, but that’s clearly wrong. AI is bad at producing useable images. I know this won’t always be the case, but by the time an ad exec can produces ads without an art team, other professions will be long gone as well.
Ai is very good at producing useable images, especially for people that can't or don't want to afford an art team. I can have an idea and generate, say, cute comics for my kid for a few cents and a couple minutes of time; that would be prohibitively expensive and a much bigger hassle dealing with an actual artist.
That said, I would agree it is less good at producing high-quality, consistent-across-time, consistent-across-detail images, and defaults to an uncanny and chabuduo lowest common denominator style.
More options
Context Copy link
Art is meh, writing style is terrible. Part of this is the lack of RLVR; the alternative just trains the model to produce the lowest common denominator, which is what we get.
But, fundamentally, I don't think the labs care about art or prose style. Writing can be slop and it'll annoy people for a couple years, while math is a load-bearing component of RSI. Get RSI, and you can catch up on writing over a long weekend.
That is probably true, but not really indicative that things will improve. The labs do care about programming, and LLMs still suck at programming. So even the thing the labs have put probably the most effort into, the machine is still below the level of a competent human.
More options
Context Copy link
I think these are categorically different than math: the theorem prover languages are at least a clear Boolean success criterion. "Is this painting/book good?" is canonically an opinion question without a singular answer.
From what I can tell, human-driven post-training has historically been done with English speakers hireable at low hourly rates, but probably not ones that appreciate Ulysses (I certainly haven't read it). Even if they could afford English department grad students, would they be willing to train, effectively, their replacements? How do you rank the writing styles of Faulkner versus Hemingway? It seems there is at least some room for legitimate creativity there.
Artistic style isn't just a matter of opinion, it's a matter of opinion in a specific context.
I swear the above sentence was an accident, and I only noticed what I was doing halfway through, but it'll work perfectly as a demonstration too. Aren't you sick of that "It's not X, it's Y" idiom right now? Judicious use of thesis/antithesis pairs was compelling back in the Before Times of 5 years ago, but because it was compelling RLHF seized upon it as Good Writing, and so now AI writing uses it everywhere and we're sick of it. Not that you loved Caesar less, but that you loved Rome more? Learn to write for yourself, Will, you hack!
Great art is supposed to have a timeless quality too, but a lot of good art is directly speaking to the wider artistic milieu of its time, and making choices about what styles and tropes can be used unashamedly vs what have become cliches that must be avoided or subverted. This is normally a stable system, because as something becomes briefly overused it immediately begins to repel other potential users, but if a huge swath of humanity is using the same handful of systems that are trained on the same total-corpus-of-human-art then we lose a lot of that stabilizing negative feedback, and the results we get stuck with are hard to avoid via simple instruction alone.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I think this is just a technical problem, frankly. You can prompt models to actually have decent writing style with enough effort which means it's possible that fine tuning or some even simpler operation on the output fixes the problem entirely. And that's a valuable product so i'm certain someone's going to come up with it eventually.
Slop writing and em dashes is the record skipping of our time, nothing more. People will miss it and try to ape it in 20 years.
People keep saying this but never share the prompts. It's not possible.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Depends on your use case. They’re definitely usable for book covers and DnD games. Artists are losing work to AI, no reason to pretend otherwise. But there are still noticeable gaps.
If you spent thousands of hours writing a novel and are going to pay for an actual printing run, the least you can do is spend $200 for someone on fiverr or vgen or whatever to make a book cover.
Though I do suspect that alot of people who need art would just rather talk to a sycophantic robot than an annoying fleshy artist, and have the instant gratification of getting the results in 1 minute.
More options
Context Copy link
Using LLMs for artwork is a very interesting case of economic forces in action.
Turns out, it's entirely possible that alot of artists are simply pricing thier results too high and are getting bit because of it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link