Uh. Wow! ChatGPT

I just told ChatGPT to write a song about a stormchaser.

AA9937DE-707C-4AC7-887A-CC68B102334F.png Verse 1: As the clouds roll in and the winds start to rise,
The stormchaser's heart begins to ignite.
He packs up his gear and hits the road,
Chasing the storm, his ultimate goal.

Chorus: Oh, stormchaser, fearless and bold
Racing across the landscape, uncontrolled.
Seeking the thrill of the raging storm,
He's always chasing, never warm.

Verse 2: The lightning flashes, the thunder roars,
The stormchaser's senses are heightened and raw.
He braves the gusts and the driving rain, Determined to capture it all, the pain
and the strain.

Chorus: Oh, stormchaser, fearless and bold,
Racing across the landscape, uncontrolled.
Seeking the thrill of the raging storm,
He's always chasing, never warm.

Bridge: He's a thrill seeker, an adrenaline junkie,
Chasing the storm, never feeling unlucky.
With a heart full of courage and a mind full of fire,
He's always chasing, never tired.

Chorus: Oh, stormchaser, fearless and bold,
Racing across the landscape, uncontrolled.
Seeking the thrill of the raging storm,
He's always chasing, never warm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chase K

James K

EF4
Mar 26, 2019
475
195
6
Colorado
Nice.

There are apparently AI systems where you can give it text lyrics, & a style, then it'll generate a 'song' from that...
This needs to be tried in one of those!!
(I think they're pretty limited in length though (might have to do it in parts)? and sometimes turn the text you give into gibberish)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Wilkinson
I think there’’s a little bit of gibberish in this one too. I can’t come up with a meaning for “never warm” at the end of the chorus. I think it needs some tweaking. We could probably somehow replace that line and put the word “warned” in there at the end of the chorus. Someone could probably come up with a creative way to make “warned” mean something describing the chaser while also making it a double-meaning with a play on a tornado warned storm.

I’m still impressed with what it did on the first try.
 
Jul 5, 2009
1,390
1,497
21
Newtown, Pennsylvania
Good one, I would suggest one little tweak, change “will go” tornado warned to “becomes” tornado warned

The bigger OT issue here: Anybody else fearful of this technology? Obviously as a chaser, and a corporate finance executive in my day job, I am no Luddite. But there is something troubling about eventually being unable to know whether any sort of content - music, writing, research papers, student papers in a university setting, even audio or video passed off as news - are authentic human creations, or AI-generated. People or organizations can pass off AI content as their own. One might say that the gibberish is a giveaway, but we all know that will eventually diminish as the technology improves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jason N

rdale

EF5
Mar 1, 2004
7,504
1,077
21
52
Lansing, MI
skywatch.org
Academic papers are not a worry at this point because it can't cite, plus it still spits out enough gibberish when you ask info on an academic topic that you know it's not real.

If the art or music or fictional books it creates are good - then go for it!
 

James K

EF4
Mar 26, 2019
475
195
6
Colorado
I do mess around with the AI art stuff, and all I can say is its impressive. Sure you can make crazy stuff, but I've also seen plenty of images that look basically like a real photo. The one spot where the AI-art systems fail completely is if they put any text on the image - its always pure gibberish.

I haven't tried ChatGPT or any other 'text' ones, but the above is pretty impressive (not just because its fairly clear, but it also has the general idea of a stormchaser..)
 
Verse 1: As the clouds roll in and the winds start to rise,
The stormchaser's heart begins to ignite.
He packs up his gear and hits the road,
Chasing the storm, his ultimate goal.

Chorus: Oh, stormchaser, fearless and bold
Racing across the landscape, uncontrolled.
Seeking the thrill of the raging storm,
He's always chasing, never warm.

Verse 2: The lightning flashes, the thunder roars,
The stormchaser's senses are heightened and raw.
He braves the gusts and the driving rain, Determined to capture it all, the pain
and the strain.

Chorus: Oh, stormchaser, fearless and bold,
Racing across the landscape, uncontrolled.
Seeking the thrill of the raging storm,
He's always chasing, never warm.

Bridge: He's a thrill seeker, an adrenaline junkie,
Chasing the storm, never feeling unlucky.
With a heart full of courage and a mind full of fire,
He's always chasing, never tired.

Chorus: Oh, stormchaser, fearless and bold,
Racing across the landscape, uncontrolled.
Seeking the thrill of the raging storm,
He's always chasing, never warm.

This is a Hank Williams Jr. kinda song for sure haha.
 
Jul 5, 2009
1,390
1,497
21
Newtown, Pennsylvania
Academic papers are not a worry at this point because it can't cite, plus it still spits out enough gibberish when you ask info on an academic topic that you know it's not real.

If the art or music or fictional books it creates are good - then go for it!
I‘m worried more about where this is clearly headed, not just where it is today… If AI can’t do citations now, I have to imagine that’s not far off. Seems relatively simple, given that AI could easily search the academic literature in the public domain and indicate the source. If it can’t do that today, I’m not sure why, but either way it can’t be far off. As far as gibberish, like I said in my post, yeah that’s a giveaway now but we all know it is going to become less and less a factor as the technology improves.

I also think art, music and books are a bigger issue than what you seem to imply, i.e. “go for it,” by which I assume you mean just enjoy the output for what it is… For me there would be a distinct difference between reading something profound, written by a human author, feeling that empathy and connection even though you never met the author, versus reading something that resonates with you but leaves you with the nagging thought that it may have been written by AI. Imagine, for example, reading a human chase account, empathizing with a fellow chaser’s frustrations, only to find it’s an entirely fictional account created by AI. Take it a step further, and imagine a digital image of a tornado that never happened, created by AI and made to appear as if it’s a real event that nobody else saw. If it’s artificial, it’s just not the same. It’s the reason a reprint is just not as valuable as the original art created by the painter’s hand. Or why an artificial plant is just not the same as a real one, no matter how “real” it looks. Or why I wouldn’t want to replace a real dog with a robotic version.

There is still much to be lost to AI in the human experience, no matter how high the quality, efficiency, or even beauty of the output…
 
May 1, 2004
3,408
810
21
Springfield, IL
www.skip.cc
Anybody else fearful of this technology?
Nope. It's just another bit of tech and a new tool like all the rest. If the AI writing term papers and taking college exams becomes a problem, then it's time to reassess the value of those papers and exams. Just like rote memorization and recitation verbatim aren't great ways of demonstrating if a person has a deep understanding of conceptual meanings, if an AI can just fetch bits of text and string them together to make passable college assignments, then maybe those assignments aren't really that useful anyway.

If automated content creation creates a crisis in authentication and validity of information, then guess what? It's time to reassess how that's done too. Frankly, we're looong overdue for an overhaul in information verification and critical thinking. The idea that any collection of words or pixels is "real" or "true" because a person or camera made it is laughably basic. That "fake news" is somehow new or more prevalent because we have new transmission channels like the internet is ridiculous. We've been spreading unvetted misinformation for thousands of years. I'm looking at you Holy Books. Oh, I don't mean *your* Holy Book. I mean all those other ones that are obviously false. Information will need a line of evidence behind it that anyone can quickly follow, a provenance, and integration into other verifiable information. "Real" or "person created" things might need something "wet" attached to them before they can be deemed authentic, if that's even needed. Otherwise folks will learn (one way or another) that in the absence of those things, all they have is merely a pile of words and pixels and nothing more.

Music, art or literature only need only sound or look "good" or evoke emotion to be valuable. Humans have also been stringing together bits of incoherent gibberish for thousands of years only for it to become a "smash hit". That an AI can also do that isn't that surprising. If the value in music and art is instead its "realness", then folks need to go to live performances or sessions where it's created in person.

If a ChatGPT successor actually learns how to cite scientific papers, use interconnected logic and higher math (it currently can't) on actual data, and produce a research paper that can not only pass peer review but is indistinguishable from human generated papers, then as far as I'm concerned, it's doing real science and should be welcomed. We generate so much data now, there's no way we could ever possibly sift through it all. Machine Learning and AI will become necessary tools to science.

As always, I think the fear with this emerging tech is that people don't yet understand what major limitations it has, and what role it will play as a useful tool. ChatGPT isn't AGI like Skynet. It's a glorified parrot. This is just like what people thought of digital computers and robotics, demonstrated in the popular scifi tropes of the 1950's, 60's, 70's... :


"I am now telling ChatGPT exactly what it can do with a lifetime supply of chocolate."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andy Wehrle
Apr 23, 2010
246
51
6
Have it combine the Tuscaloosa tornado of 2011 as The Dunwich Horror…rushing airy presences…a squirming mass of ropes…
 

James K

EF4
Mar 26, 2019
475
195
6
Colorado
JamesCaruso said:
If AI can’t do citations now, I have to imagine that’s not far off.
There is one out there that can (don't remember what its called) but at this point its just citing stuff like Wikipedia.

Skip Talbot said:
If the AI writing term papers and taking college exams becomes a problem, then it's time to reassess the value of those papers and exams.
Fact is that apparently is starting to become an issue, its something college instructors have to watch out for on term papers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JamesCaruso

Jason N

EF1
Mar 2, 2021
84
75
6
South Carolina
Some co-workers of mine and I were talking about this at work today and the topic of, "does this technology hinder or promote innovation" came up. I think if you are asking it to reach out into the abyss of information to produce content, research, or information, do you have to "train" or "aim" it to stay away from certain sources? and does that end up being a self-licking ice cream cone in the sense of, "it's producing what I asked for faster, formatting it, but is the information actually good and am I going to end up doing more work or less work to make it "verifiable" or trusted. (Shrug?)

I think there would be some inherent benefits, however. if it can "heard the cattle" so to speak, I think it then becomes more of a benefit in terms of wasting less time to create the core, giving you more time to massage and mold the data to your needs? (Another Shrug?)

interesting times ahead, and would someone make a State of the Chase 2023 room already?? lol