> Why do you believe this? I have some familiarity with natural language processing and think that generating passable computer poetry is a fairly rudimentary t

> Why do you believe this? I have some familiarity with natural language processing and think that generating passable computer poetry is a fairly rudimentary task. Tell your model about meter, tell it about rhyme, learn word associations. Pick a language, give it every line of poetry you can find and hit go. What makes you think you could distinguish computational verse from something written by human hands? See, people always say that the trouble is getting your ML model to have some semantics to what it produces, to produce texts which somehow manage to genuinely correspond to the real world rather than just to the use of language. With poetry they might say, we don't just want something that fits the forms, but something with content, with soul. I say, yes, that's all true, and have you ever tried getting a randomly sampled human being to produce prose or poetry with meaningful content and soul? Untrained, we're possibly even worse than the neural nets!