What do the authors even imagine success to be, here? At least some approximation to the hype surrounding GPT-3 -- which seems to be "near-human lucidness near

What do the authors even imagine success to be, here? At least some approximation to the hype surrounding GPT-3 -- which seems to be "near-human lucidness nearly all the time". Sometimes they deliberately describe a surreal situation, then penalize GPT-3 for continuing it in an identically surreal manner In the spirit of "not even wrong" - GPT-3's answers were, sorry to say, "not even surreal". Far too often, they were just complete gibberish - with no amusement value, let alone sublime literary value (that would go along with the description of "surreal"). Which was precisely Marcus's critique.