6 ms·

Or it's just plagiarism, eg "windows blinked awake": https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciaengler.com/2018/08/11/how-christian-students-ca

by daveguy 3mo ago

Or it's just plagiarism, eg "windows blinked awake": https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciaengler.com/2018/08/11/how-christian-students-can-prepare-for-secular-higher-education/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciae... See also "wind moved restlessly", "weather became angry". And raging storm? I mean come on... I won't even put that last one in quotes. And like a sibling reply pointed out, personificiation is not the same as anthropomophism. Nor is plagiarized personification. It has no inner thoughts, and no fondness of anything. It's nothing but a cheap, superficial facsimile of human writing and nothing more. Great for form filling and boilerplate though. Not so great for anything else.

ben_w 3mo ago
> Or it's just plagiarism, eg "windows blinked awake": > https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciaengler.com/2018/08/11/how-christian-students-can-prepare-for-secular-higher-education/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciae... > See also "wind moved restlessly", "weather became angry". And raging storm? I mean come on... I won't even put that last one in quotes. What's your point here? Mine is: Nobody seriously objects to phrases such as these. So for me, in this case: the more cliché, the better. Or another way, you were previously objecting to a human using "typical English" to describe an LLM's failure to use "typical English". > personificiation is not the same as anthropomophism An unimportant though technically correct statement. In both my example and the comment from xg15 that you previously objected to, "personificiation" is the correct term. While anthropomorphisation treats a thing as a person, personificiation describes a thing with person-like qualities or actions, like calling an LLM "fond": https://hearth.sh/guides/anthropomorphism-vs-personification https://hearth.sh/guides/anthropomorphism-vs-personification LLMs do anthropomorphise themselves, though, with their linguistic selections. (Or, as a normal person would call them, "linguistic choices").

by daveguy 3mo ago

ben_w 3mo ago

> Or it's just plagiarism, eg "windows blinked awake": > https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciaengler.com/2018/08/11/how-christian-students-can-prepare-for-secular-higher-education/ https://web.archive.org/web/20190825132048/https://patriciae... > See also "wind moved restlessly", "weather became angry". And raging storm? I mean come on... I won't even put that last one in quotes. What's your point here? Mine is: Nobody seriously objects to phrases such as these. So for me, in this case: the more cliché, the better. Or another way, you were previously objecting to a human using "typical English" to describe an LLM's failure to use "typical English". > personificiation is not the same as anthropomophism An unimportant though technically correct statement. In both my example and the comment from xg15 that you previously objected to, "personificiation" is the correct term. While anthropomorphisation treats a thing as a person, personificiation describes a thing with person-like qualities or actions, like calling an LLM "fond": https://hearth.sh/guides/anthropomorphism-vs-personification https://hearth.sh/guides/anthropomorphism-vs-personification LLMs do anthropomorphise themselves, though, with their linguistic selections. (Or, as a normal person would call them, "linguistic choices").