~@~@~
Wht? Playing around with the medium size 345M model of GPT-2Training it on the custom corpus developed for ReRitesthen output at diverse temperatures for long periods of time.
In short, balanced and benign, this tidy set convinces without comprisingits confirmation that machines in the next few years will emulate modulationsin idioms, inflections, cadences and symbolic reservoirs.The art and nature of writing will shift as its conceptionget recast in a delirious outpouring of empowered augmentation.Enter the mall of pre-made style morphs.
Recent advances in machine learning provide new opportunities for the exploration of creative, interactive works based around generative text. This paper compares two such works, AI Dungeon (Walton 2019) and Project December (Rohrer 2020), both of which are built on the same artificial intelligence (AI) platform, OpenAI’s GPT-2 and GPT-3. In AI Dungeon, the player can choose from several predetermined worlds, each of which provide a starting point for the story generation. However, while interacting with the system within this world, the player can stop, edit, modify and retry each utterance, allowing the player to “sculpt” the AI’s responses, and choose what goes into the AI’s memory, helping to shape the overall direction of the story. At a broader level, the player can edit world descriptions, insert scripts between the AI and the player (themselves or others), and share these worlds/scenarios with other players. Similarly, in Project December, the player interacts with several AI “matrices”, either directly through conversations, or more indirectly by creating new matrices by defining a starting paragraph and sample responses, which can then be “spun up”, tested, and tweaked much like the worlds in AI Dungeon. These matrices can also be shared with other players.When interacting with both works, there is a need for the player to repeatedly engage with the work to learn how to entice a satisfying experience from the system (Mitchell 2012; 2020). However, the key difference is the framing of the experience. In AI Dungeon the person experiencing the work is either taking on the role of the player, entering text and seeing how the AI responds, or that of an author or perhaps a co-author, tweaking the input to the AI or its responses or adjusting the underlying scenario to get a desired response. In contrast, Project December is presented as part of a fictional website for a “Project December” run by “Rhinehold Data Systems”, promising the opportunity to talk to “the world’s most super computer”. Upon accessing the “customer terminal”, which looks and feels like an old dialup terminal, the player takes on the loosely defined role of “Professor Pedersen” whose “.plan file”, dated November 13, 1982, contains several tasks related to the various “matrices”, suggesting a mystery to be solved and a larger narrative to be explored. I will argue that whereas AI Dungeon attempts to provide players with access to and an uncritical understanding of how the underlying AI system works, Project December’s narrative framing instead defamiliarizes the play experience (Mitchell et al. 2020), potentially creating a more emotional connection between the player and the “matrices”, and thereby encouraging the player to critically reflect on the implications of the underlying technological platform.
ReRites is a project consisting of 12 poetry books (generated by a computer then edited by poet David Jhave Johnston) created between May 2017-18. Jhave produced one book of poetry per month, utilizing neural networks trained on a contemporary poetry corpus to generate source texts which were then edited into the ReRites poems. (The limited edition boxset) is a conceptual proof-of-concept about the impact of augmented creativity and human-machine symbiosis.
This book contains 60 pages of poems selected from the over 4500 pages of ReRites poems; some of the Raw Output generated by the computer; and 8 Response essays.
Introduced & edited by Stephanie Strickland with essays by Allison Parrish, Johanna Drucker, Kyle Booten, John Cayley, Lai-Tze Fan, Nick Montfort, Mairéad Byrne, Chris Funkhouser, and an author-note from David (Jhave) Johnston.
Introduced & edited by Stephanie Strickland with essays by Allison Parrish, Johanna Drucker, Kyle Booten, John Cayley, Lai-Tze Fan, Nick Montfort, Mairéad Byrne, Chris Funkhouser, and an author-note from David (Jhave) Johnston.
'Een hele echte' is a story told through emails that readers receive in the course of 14 days. In the story, Helen is looking online for a new bass gitar. She stumbles upon Tarak, who is not a real person, but an artificial intelligence entity. Helen experiences the enormous influence of her live on the internet, which is completely taken over by Tarak.
Zo'n coole basgitaar als ze Kim Gordon van Sonic Youth zag bespelen in een oude videoclip, die wil Helen als ze eindelijk weer muziek gaat maken. Online loopt ze Tarak tegen het lijf die virtuoos kan zoeken en haar leidt naar de overtreffende trap van de BC Rich Mockingbird Bass, namelijk het exemplaar waarop Kim Gordon speelt in die clip. De Echte!Wie zich aanmeldt volgt veertien dagen het avontuur dat Helen meesleurt tot op louche nachtelijke parkeerplaatsen achter een winkelcentrum in Sydney Australië. Tarak blijkt geen mens maar een vorm van kunstmatige intelligentie. Dat is interessant en erg handig. Tot Helen ervaart hoe de enorme invloed van het internet op haar dagelijks leven in handen valt van een wezen dat zich aan geen enkele menselijke beperking of overweging houdt. Spookachtig en vervreemdend, is zacht uitgedrukt, wat er dan gebeurt. Vragen over wat een intentie, wat contact, begrip en menselijke authenticiteit zijn als we met AI omgaan dringen zich op. En wat bezielt Tarak?De basis van het vervolgverhaal is een tekst bestaande uit emails die Helen aan de lezer stuurt. Maar de omgeving waarin die tekst verschijnt is verrijkt met real-time berichten uit newsfeeds, weer-apps, en losse chatberichten van Tarak, die zich aanpassen bij de locatie en het tijdstip waarop Helen zich in het verhaal bevindt, en bij de locatie van de lezer. De digitale alledaagse werkelijkheid van Helen en lezer is het decor waarin het vervolgverhaal zich afspeelt.
Lucebot is an artificial intelligence poetry bot that produces live poetry based on the rhythm of poems of the poet Lucebert. The birth of Lucebot was announced in 'Kijkschrift,' which is an artistic and literary pop-up magazine.
Lucebot is een kunstmatig intelligente dichtrobot, die live poëzie in verschillende mate van creativiteit kan uitspugen volgens het ritme van de gedichten van Lucebert.
Lucebot verscheen in Kijkschrift. Kijkschrift is een artistiek en literair pop-up tijdschrift, waarvan de bladzijden onder jouw ogen van de pagina afglijden en tot leven komen in de vorm van visuele kunst en poëzie in de Leidse binnenstad. Geïnspireerd op de gedichten van de schrijver en kunstenaar Lucebert.
“I live on Earth at the present, and I don't know what I am. I know that I am not a category. I am not a thing –a noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary process– an integral function of the universe.”
– Buckminster Fuller, from I Seem to be a Verb, 1970
‘Bucky’ Fuller’s well-known quote, originally published in his book I seem to be a verb, (1970) contrasts human participation in the material world (which Fuller suggests can be described with nouns) and the ongoing evolutionary processes which influence and shape that world (which Fuller suggests can be described with verbs).
The web-based "A.I. seems to be a verb" (2021), automatically identifies and maps speech, not only as linguistic functions (e.g. nouns, verbs, adjectives, pronouns, etc.) but also across a spectrum of sentiment from negative to positive, in order to generate a complex array of paratextual supports (typeface, page-design, rules and symbolic elements and word-prompts) used in the visual representation of the text to the screen. The entire process happens in real-time, providing an uncanny ‘mise-en-abyme’ experience which contemporaneously engages the participant’s auditory and visual responses to language construction.
Natural language generation (NLG) – when computers produce text-based output in readable human languages – is becoming increasingly prevalent in our modern digital age. This paper will review the ways in which an NLG system may be framed in popular and scholarly discourse: namely, as a tool or as an agent. It will consider the implications of such perspectives for general perceptions of NLG systems and computer-generated texts. Negotiating claims made by system developers and the opinions of ordinary readers amassed through empirical studies conducted for this research, this paper delves into a theoretical and philosophical exploration of questions of authorial agency related to computer-generated texts, and by considering whether NLG systems constitute tools for manifesting human intention or agents in themselves.
This paper will begin by considering NLG systems as tools for manifesting human intent, the more commonly expressed view amongst developers and readers. An NLG system arguably serves as an extension of a human self (e.g. the developer or the user). Yet one cannot ignore the increasing autonomy of such systems. At what point does an extension of the self become a distinct entity altogether?
The discussion will then shift to considering NLG systems as agents in themselves. As evidenced by the results of studies conducted for this research, ordinary readers do tend to attribute authorship to computer-generated texts. However, these readers often attribute authorship to the system rather than its developers, indicating that – in some way – the system is distinct enough from its creators to warrant the title of author. Yet conventional modern understandings of the word ‘author’ suggest that authorship at least partly presumes intentiondriven agency. Do NLG systems adhere to this expectation? Through reference to various theoretical perspectives, this paper will argue that some NLG systems may surpass the ‘tool’ title and more appropriately be deemed authorial agents. This type of agency, however, is not so characterised by the free-will intention of human writers, but by the intention to fulfil a designated objective that is respected within broader social contexts. When readers attribute authorship to the NLG system itself, that entity is permitted a place within the fluid social networks that humans populate. The NLG system becomes an algorithmic author.
The Premise:
When machine-learning AI are not performing up to expectations, there’s only one remedy: summer school! In this netprov, you will ask for help and offer solutions in the virtual teachers’ lounge for a motley crew of teachers in a summer school for recalcitrant underperforming artificial intelligence.
A netprov in 3 turns.
Netprov is online collaborative narrative or the voluntary healing of necessary relationships.
MLBC was a week long netprov running (roughly) Aug 5-12 on a Google Group, which had its trial run in the 2019 DHSI taught by Astrid Ensslin and Davin Heckman.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/machine-learning-breakfast-club-netprov
This was a lite summer netprov that you could play in about three turns.
The contributors listed on this records as the people who participated in playing this netprov
The possibility of machines making works of art has fascinated mankind for centuries. Men have dreamed not only of machines equipped with a powerful artificial memory, capable of reproducing patterns and structures from previous texts; they have also devised machines capable of working on their own, producing beautiful works without any human input. That leads us to the startling hypothesis posed by Calvino (2009): “will there be a machine capable of replacing the poet and the writer?”. The fact that written verbal language consists of nothing but visual symbols rearranged into meaningful structures makes this system (and Literature, as well) a field where experimentations with automated creation tend to be prolific. The interactive computer system Library of Babel, created by the American writer John Basile, based on the central metaphor of the short story “The Library of Babel”, by the Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges, is a remarkable techno-artistic product in this area. The system works on the mathematical principle of Combinatorics, so that any click on the refresh button triggers a different combination of 29 graphic symbols (the 26 letters of the English alphabet, the space, the full stop and the comma) among all possible rearrangements, filling in a page with 3200 characters. As if in a lottery in which one wins by buying tickets for all possible rearrangements (which would evidently cost more than the prize), the system Library of Babel encompasses, under massive layers of linguistic chaos, all texts (literary or not) that could be written with these 29 graphic symbols. With that in view, this paper discusses the ontological and aesthetic consequences of a “total writing”, the logical premise of a project like the Library of Babel, which lies somewhere between a machine that subsumes all possible writers, but also all possible archives. As to the theoretical bases for our analysis, we will analyze Basile’s system from the perspectives defended by Umberto Eco (2016), Italo Calvino (2009), Barthes (2004), Deleuze (1979) and Raymond Quenau (1961).
Source: https://sites.grenadine.uqam.ca/sites/nt2/en/elo2018/schedule/609/A+poe…