Google's algorithm wrote some "poetry"
http://www.wired.co.uk/article/google-artificial-intelligence-poetry
i went to the store to buy some groceries.
i store to buy some groceries.
i were to buy any groceries.
horses are to buy any groceries.
horses are to buy any animal.
horses the favorite any animal.
horses the favorite favorite animal.
horses are my favorite animal.
oh my god
its shit
STEMfags btfo
do you mind if i share this on reddit so people think i know about robots and stuff
amazing, isn't it?
so, what is it?
it hurts, isnt it?
why would you do that?
"you can do it.
"i can do it.
I can't do it.
"i can do it.
"don't do it.
"i can do it.
i couldn't do it.
>>8104530
have you heard about an ai who went to buy groceries?
horses were his favorite animals!
p.s. afaik computers can write poems with meter and rhymes for more than two dozen years now, those poems dont have any sense though
>>8104539
Save it, it's all yours my friend
This one would fit perfectly on Tumblr
there is no one else in the world.
there is no one else in sight.
they were the only ones who mattered.
they were the only ones left.
he had to be with me.
she had to be with him.
i had to do this.
i wanted to kill him.
i started to cry.
i turned to him
it's basically just step by step turning one sentence into another, only with some weird artifacts in between. it's completely meaningless.
>>8104573
>it's completely meaningless.
you mean like real poetry? :>
>>8104530
>mfw an ai just meme'd
>>8104530
This is just an exercise in the ability of humans to find meaning in anything.
Still better than Shakespeare
>>8104530
>amazingly mournful he said
>amazingly mournful she said
>amazingly mournful they had said
>I know I had said
>I know she said
>amazingly gibberish I favorite any animal
>>8104637
the human mind is designed to search for sentience in the environment around it mostly because in the days of yore that sentience had it out for us.
>>8104637
/thread
>>8104637
This. It's just playing with associations and syntax.
Also, most of them don't rhyme and have no discernible meter, which means they aren't true poems if you dispute this I'll KILL YOU, I FUCKING MEAN IT THIS TIME. POEMS ARE MEANT TO BE RHYMED AND SUNG. WHERE IS THAT BUTTERFLY FUCK I WANT HIM TO TALK SHIT. AMA
Honestly the whole Wired magazine article is built upon a really fucking dumb error: In writing this, the author selected certain poems as "good" and included them within the article, but this undercuts the whole argument of the piece: the article in no way supports the notion that google's AI can write poetry, because the editor screened out all the randomness, the "non-poems" which did not make sense. In doing this, he himself plays the part of poet, as he is, through his selection process, imposing an order upon huge amounts of chaotic data: we aren't shown the overwhelming overflow of complete nonsense from the algorithm.
I wouldn't be mad, if only Wired did not have a bad habit of doing this.
>>8104541
I am cry
>>8105254
you're wrong and if i get dubs you have to admit it
>>8105254
>poems must rhyme
You just reminded me of Emily of New Moon.
Amazing. Tao Lin is getting better all the time
As Harold Bloom says, "There's no discernible talent." I strive to be of a fair and judicial mind and to set forth justly, without supersession or innuendo, the divergent opinions of others. Hence, I will do my best to present evidence both for and against the claim that Google fully deserves the bitter fruit of the fury of its persecutors. The first thing I want to bring up is that Google has an ego of galactic proportions. Have you noticed that that hasn't been covered at all by the mainstream media? Maybe they're afraid that Google will retaliate by stonewalling on issues in which taxpayers see a vital public interest.
1/2
>>8107259
It remains to be seen whether Google's little empire is capable of self-critique. Will its members acknowledge their own insularity and excesses, or will they continue down the path of smug self-congratulation and vanity, never passing up an opportunity to take rights away from individuals on the basis of prejudice, myth, irrational belief, inaccurate information, and outright falsehood? In either case, Google has two imperatives. The first is to convince others that rude haggersnashes are the “chosen people” of scriptural prophecy. The second imperative is to hamstring our efforts to let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream. Don't give Google's ideas a credibility they don't deserve. If Google ever does take us all on an entirely reckless ride into the unknown, it will instantly have as its implacable and passionate enemies millions of people who want to enable patriots to use their freedoms to save their freedoms. Such people know that I assert that someday the vast majority of people will be eager to institute change. As we look to our future, however, we need to remain cognizant of our past. For example, we must always remember that every mingy crypto-fascist must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag of imperialism, and begin to anesthetize the human spirit. That's sufficient evidence for me, at least, to conclude that Google once said that its coalition consists entirely of lovable, cuddly people who would never dream of ascribing opinions to me that I don't even hold. Oh, please. I'm just glad I hadn't eaten dinner right before I heard it say that. Otherwise, I'd probably still be vomiting too hard to tell you that Google's plan is to submerge us in a sea of emotionalism. However, unlike the Nazis, Google doesn't conceal its malevolent goals.
2/2
>>8107267
Perhaps it's confident that no one will notice that finding the best way to combat the unholy ideology of ruffianism that has infected the minds of so many uncivilized slumlords is a challenging problem indeed. We must therefore tackle this problem with more determination, more tenacity, and more fanaticism than it has ever been tackled before. Only then will people realize that Google has not yet been successful at guaranteeing the destruction of anything that looks like a vital community. Still, give it some time, and I'm sure it'll figure out how to do something at least that capricious, probably more so. In any event, I have some of Google's palaverous codices in front of me right now. In one of them, Google warrants that public opinion is a reliable indicator of what's true and what isn't. If you don't find that shocking then consider that Google's stubborn, worthless gibes cause death by a thousand blows. While no one blow is strong enough, together they make our lives miserable. Let me close by remarking that if I have succeeded, as I hope and believe I have, in presenting such a combination of facts and arguments as has demonstrated the propriety of insisting on a policy of zero tolerance toward cannibalism, I shall regard it as evidence complete that these lines have been judiciously penned.
3/2
>>8107188
more like identifying dubs
>>8104573
>muh authorial intent
This is an 18+ board
>>8107277
Shiiitttttt
>>8107307
>mfw
desu the google "poems" suck
>>8105254
I'm here to support you, Anon. Poems must have regular meter. If they don't they can get the fuck out. Maya Angelou isn't a real poet, neither is Walt Whitman.
if tao lin wrote this shit people would like it
>>8104530
AI slam poet when?
i want that stephen hawking voice to tell me about the struggles of black vaginas
>>8107894
>Usura is a murrain, usura
blunteth the needle in the maid’s hand
>Usura rusteth the chisel
>Usura slayeth the child in the womb
ushura is my favorite animal:3
>>8107219
Based Montgomery bro. Life ain't living without puffy sleeves.
>>8104530
To be honest its not worse than the faire you see at the average poetry slam and refreshingly apolitical by comparison.
>>8108011
it doesn't make sense at all
![animal-boxer[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/Fqz9yVd.png "animal-boxer[1].png")
>>8108011
>refreshingly apolitical
implying
Reminds me of late Beckett.
>>8108083
By apolitical I mean its not whinging about being oppressed for being supergendered
>>8108083
i smiled.
