4 ms·
Having played around with the same scenario, I’ve come to the naive conclusion that the lack of creative output is because the current generation of GPT is only
by redeux 4y ago
Having played around with the same scenario, I’ve come to the naive conclusion that the lack of creative output is because the current generation of GPT is only able to regurgitate and not create. This makes everything feel very derivative.
On the other hand, if you act as the creative mind and use GPT to accelerate your output, it becomes more useful.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y agoAm I off base, or is "create" sort of amorphous in this context? It's already creating novel sentences and paragraphs. What is difference between that and real creation? Personally it seems to me that if you feed a statistical model of a ton of input it's going to feed back the average of that input, leading to uninspiring phrases. Regarding game creation, we'd need to tell it about game mechanics, and I have no idea how it'd determine what's interesting or how it would innovate.
- turnsout 4y agoI think that's it—these models are definitely capable of creating output not seen in the input, which we would define as human "creativity," and they can even combine concepts in novel ways, which is loosely what we call "innovation." But they are quite biased to create plausible output, which severely restricts their ability to create something interesting. You can dial up the temperature, but this quickly pushes the output from "bland" to "totally unhinged."