Where Do We Go From Here?

Testing Out New AI Tools for Writing - The Good 👍and The Bad 👎

I've been experimenting with some of the new large language AI models like ChatGPT Bard and Claude to help summarize and clean up my dyslexic writing. At first, it seemed amazing - I could just dictate my random thoughts and the AI would turn it into clear, readable text. I even had it generate content like blog posts, YouTube scripts, and Instagram captions.

However, I started noticing some issues:

• The AI can be overenthusiastic, especially when mentioning product names. It reads like advertising copy. I have had to rewrite these sections to keep them factual.

• Outrageous claims and incorrect facts. About 40% of the time, the AI includes claims or "facts" that are just plain wrong. I end up removing entire paragraphs.

• About 30% of the time, the content is good as is. The other 30% needs some reworking to tone down the language.

Clearly there's an issue here with misinformation. My current theory is that these large language models are trained on in-discriminant internet data containing conspiracy theories, misinformation, and bias. Garbage in, garbage out. 

I'm finding Anthropic's Claude model more reliable with fewer glaring errors. I have used it on this post, but I still have to carefully review any AI-generated text before publishing. 

As AI becomes more ubiquitous, it's crucial that we understand how these models are trained and what biases they may contain. We have to establish checks and balances, verifying information and not blindly trusting AI outputs.

I'll keep experimenting with AI writing assistants, AI in photography and digital Graphics (generative AI images such as the one abouve), but always maintain oversight. Stay tuned for more on responsible use of generative AI.

Co-incidence or Urban Myth?

"Google recognizes posts created from ChatGPT and downgrades them in search"

I've seen similar comments on several Instagram reels (I'd never followed them by the way they were pushed at me), google news, youtube and a couple of blog posts. Sounds like a bit of viral hype/myth to me but thought I would check my blog stats.

Well isn't that a coincidence?

I still doubt that things are moving that fast, and are so competitive. Maybe they are. There does seem to be a race to claim technical dominance of the ChatAI and AIart fields. Also I'm not sure I yet trust OpenAI to be driving the developments, there are the issues of secrecy, open letters by many important people and experts to have a pause in building of bigger models and not forgetting the whole issue of the ethics of scraping the uncensored net for data. Finally, it is logical that having the training of these deep networks based on these unverified sources include all the bias and unfettered untruths that are increasing within the unrestricted websites and social media, with many of those publishing "content" hiding behind anonymity, What should we expect?

Personally, I'm not thrilled that Google might be one potentially trying to dominate yet another field/service that so many people are flocking towards. Google has an extensive history of introducing new things and then killing them, They prefer to call it deprecation.

Anyway I'm suspicious it might be true and I rather let those interested find my thoughts rather than have to get through an unnecessary layer of possible google "censorship". So no more blog posts written (or even reviewed) by ChatGPT. I'll still be investigating how artists and photographers might use and be affected by this technology. 

So, if you are interested in my opinion please stick around.

The “A Picture is worth a 1000 Words” Project

This might be a bit long but it documents an interesting self-referencing project I envisioned to have Deep Learning AI create and reuse something in a self-referencing strange loop. I consider this a personal Art Project BUT it was interesting, and may I suggest worth reading. 

Does AI really know what it is doing?

 1. First up I gave chatGPT the following task.

It actually only wrote 499 words but they do seem intelligent and coherent enough (in a roundabout way). They are reproduced unedited below.

2. I took this text and duplicated it and literally added “two words.” then reproduced it on a single A4 sheet (I had to make it a landscape orientation and make the font tiny)

3.  I photographed it (to make it an image).

4. Then I submitted the same 1000-word quote as a prompt and a photograph of the text to Stable Diffusion as a reference/starter image. Not sure what it is trying to portray (if anything). Yet I can see how it is related to my 1000 word project.

The text from ChatGPT …..

The phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words" is a timeless adage that has been passed down through generations. It speaks to the idea that visual imagery can convey a wealth of meaning and emotion in a way that words cannot always capture. This quote has become so ubiquitous that it is often used in everyday conversation, advertising, and even in academic circles. However, the idea behind it is much deeper and more complex than the simple phrase suggests.

To truly understand the significance of this quote, we must first explore the relationship between words and images. Words are powerful tools for communication, but they have their limitations. They rely on the reader's ability to interpret them correctly, and they can be subject to different interpretations depending on the reader's perspective. Images, on the other hand, are more universally understood. They can communicate ideas and emotions in a way that is less dependent on interpretation and more dependent on the visual experience.

One of the main advantages of visual imagery is that it can capture complex emotions and ideas that are difficult to express in words. For example, an image of a sunset over a calm ocean can evoke a sense of peace and tranquility that is hard to capture in words. Similarly, an image of a child's face can convey a range of emotions from joy to sadness, without the need for a single word. These emotions and ideas can be conveyed in an instant through an image, while it would take much longer to express them through words.

Another advantage of visual imagery is that it can convey information quickly and efficiently. This is particularly true in the age of social media and the internet, where people are bombarded with information every day. A well-crafted image can capture a person's attention and convey a message much more effectively than a block of text. This is why social media platforms like Instagram and Pinterest have become so popular, as they allow people to share images and visual content in a way that is easily digestible and engaging.

Despite these advantages, it is important to remember that images and words are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they often work together to convey meaning and emotion. For example, a news article may use words to describe an event, but it is often accompanied by an image that helps to bring the story to life. Similarly, a marketing campaign may rely on both words and images to convey its message and connect with its audience.

In conclusion, the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words" captures the idea that visual imagery can convey a wealth of meaning and emotion in a way that words cannot always capture. While words are powerful tools for communication, images have their advantages, particularly in their ability to capture complex emotions and ideas quickly and efficiently. Ultimately, it is the combination of words and images that can create a truly powerful and engaging message.

…..Actually only 499 words

I also submitted the prompt to Dall.E (although I couldn’t submit a reference/starter image). These don’t make a lot of sense to me. Although they are photorealistic?

And also a couple of other systems, similar to MidJourney, again not making a lot of sense.

But my favourite is still Style Transfer. I can see a little creative self-reference here, I’m just not sure it was created intentionally

All images, other than those created in Dall.E 4, where created at @nightcafe studio

PS: If you want to consider "worth" to be represented by bandwidth or file space required. Then an image will cost at least between 5 and 10 times that of the equivalent raw text, or even 100 to 300 times if you need something of higher resolution. SO a picture costs a lot more than 1000 words to move around the internet. 

Some more thoughts and experience with deep learning of neural networks

This was initially a postscript to the previous article about Luminar. I’m a classic dyslexic, and struggle to write still, even using a computer my typing text is a bit of a struggle and has red underlined words on most lines, punctuation is missing and I might waffle on a bit. So I have been looking at getting GhatGPT to edit my words. I submitted yesterday's draft post with the prompt rewrite for a blog post. And rewrite it did

“Luminar, the popular photo editing software, has come a long way since its inception. ….. They were the original developers of Nik Collection and Snapseed, two of the most popular post-processing tools in the apple market.”

“Nevertheless, Skylum's commitment to innovation is admirable, and it will be interesting to see what new AI iterations of Luminar will come out in the future.”

There was quite a bit of positive promotion of the wonders of Luminar and how thrilled I was with it elsewhere in the text returned. If you read my post I wasn’t exactly thrilled. although I do use the software regularly. Its enthusiasm was really stretching the truth, and I only used the ChatGPT output as a guide for my post in a few places. This really bought home that you must be sceptical of this AI and fact-checking its output is super important. 

1. There is an obvious conspiracy theory that big companies are already paying OpenAI for good reviews whenever specific brands, company names or keywords are used. I do doubt this is the case yet (and sorry I even mentioned it). 
2. A more likely explanation is the blogging world, and specifically “influencers” have filled the space with very favourable reviews and self-promotions.  And stuffed the “content” with relevant #hashtags. These have totally overwhelmed honest reviews or news and as a result the deep learning has been trained on a very positively biased data set. Ok that is exactly what the net is like these days so why am I surprised? 

Just be careful what you believe coming from AI, if you even know it was AI generated.

I’ll also be careful not to ask ChatGPT to rewrite in the future.