I made a similar point in defense of Shakespeare[0], and one reply pointed out a kind of category error on my part: > The samples from all of the examples are

I made a similar point in defense of Shakespeare[0], and one reply pointed out a kind of category error on my part: > The samples from all of the examples are nonsense. What's interesting is that they, mostly, follow the form of the original. These examples appear much less nonsensical than those, but that is (I'd hypothesize) because rap is so much more grammatically and rhetorically liberal. It does make me wonder how we would distinguish "true" semantics from (trained) formal imitations, when the latter are growing in sophistication. Still, it's a danger in this kind of article that, to quote again from that thread, > it's a usual tendency of NNs to produce output that looks meaningful to non-experts, yet is complete gibberish to experts. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12338081 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12338081