Fuck AI

1504 readers

97 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

founded 9 months ago

MODERATORS

1120

Fuck up a book for me please (lemmy.world)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

526 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Oh Ann, you rainbow-infused space unicorn. If we allow this now, what's to stop them from completely rewriting every classic work of fiction to fit their worldview?

I say no re-writing should be allowed. Learn to read, people and learn to love doing it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Yeah, get that West Side Story bullshit out of here. If you want to learn about Romeo and Juliet, you should read it in the original Shakespeare, preferably in his original hand writing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Thaaaaat's different, eh? Nobody should be opposed to someone writing new works from scratch, even if they are inspired by something else. People do that all the time and should keep doing that.

I'm just opposed to letting software (controlled by people who don't expose their intentions and pretend it's all automated with the best intentions) re-write either Romeo & Juliet or West Side Story, for any purpose, including to assist people.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

West Side Story was made so that a new generation could understand Romeo and Juliet. It did well what this AI is probably going to do poorly. I agree that this is a dumb idea for a service, and I really doubt any of the current AIs will do it the original works any justice when it comes to wordplay, clever phrasing, or other subtle details expert authors put into their works. That doesn't, however, mean that rewriting works to be more accessible isn't a very valid thing to do. Hell, that's what translation does.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

If you want to learn about Romeo and Juliet, you should read it in the original Shakespeare, preferably in his original hand writing.

This but unironically?

West Side Story was a real transformation of the work that added in places and subtracted in others.

If you want to learn about R+J, you absolutely should read the original. Better yet, you should see a performance by a professional Shakespeare company.

Don't watch the Spielberg knock off. Don't even settle for the Baz Luhrmann film. Watch the original if you can.

Purely on it's face, it is an incredible piece of artwork. You can enjoy it entirely in it's original form.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

Wait till someone tells you about translations and language evolution

[–] [email protected] -2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

now say that without sounding ableist.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I think we can help people who need help without re-writing classic novels. Who are you thinking would be benefited by this? I wonder if I could suggest some other technology or approach which does help them without rewriting an author's works.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 5 months ago

firstly, so you hate all Reader's Digest abridged books, then? This isn't a new concept.

As for who, from what everyone else has already written, so I don't have to come up with anything original to defend: non-native English speakers learning the language. People with reading disabilities. Honestly, just spend a little while reading through some of the comments which address your "but I lack imagination and any concept of people different to me" issue. plenty of good answers here.