I thought I'd have a laugh, so I asked ChatGPT for a sonnet in the style of Shakespeare.
What it gave me has caused me to gulp with astonishment. It looks pretty good to me; maybe
a little more modern English than Elizabethan, but, still, it has a spark; as well as good
iambic pentameters and rhymes.
******************
You said:
write a sonnet in the style of shakespeare
ChatGPT said:
Certainly! Here's a Shakespearean-style sonnet for you:
When twilight falls and paints the skies with gold,
The stars emerge, as whispers of the night;
The moon, a silver orb, her secrets told,
And soft winds sing of dreams within our sight.
Yet time, that thief, doth steal from youth's bright flame,
And bids us age before the hour is due.
No mortal heart can stay its endless claim,
Though love may bloom and linger, ever true.
But in your eyes, I find the world anew,
A spark that lights the path through shadowed days;
A love that beats within my soul, so true,
To guide me through life's ever-winding maze.
So let the years pass on, as they must go,
For in your love, I find eternal glow.
I hope this resonates with you! Would you like me to try a different theme or style for
another one?
By messaging ChatGPT, you agree to our Terms and have read our Privacy Policy.
Don't share sensitive information. Chats may be reviewed for safety and abuse prevention.
Learn more
ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.I use it a lot to write code snippets. Edge's CoPilot, but they surely are okay. I do
I thought I'd have a laugh, so I asked ChatGPT for a sonnet in the style
of Shakespeare. What it gave me has caused me to gulp with astonishment.
It looks pretty good to me; maybe a little more modern English than Elizabethan, but, still, it has a spark; as well as good iambic
pentameters and rhymes.
******************
You said:
write a sonnet in the style of shakespeare
ChatGPT said:
Certainly! Here's a Shakespearean-style sonnet for you:
When twilight falls and paints the skies with gold,
The stars emerge, as whispers of the night;
The moon, a silver orb, her secrets told,
And soft winds sing of dreams within our sight.
Yet time, that thief, doth steal from youth's bright flame,
And bids us age before the hour is due.
No mortal heart can stay its endless claim,
Though love may bloom and linger, ever true.
But in your eyes, I find the world anew,
A spark that lights the path through shadowed days;
A love that beats within my soul, so true,
To guide me through life's ever-winding maze.
So let the years pass on, as they must go,
For in your love, I find eternal glow.
I hope this resonates with you!
How does the program do that?
I used to earn my daily bread programming commercial mainframes. But
this AI "in the style of" beats me. I've done Walt Whitman, Louis
Carroll, William Wordsworth and others; and all win my praise.
And that's only one facet of the AI phenomenon.
I'd have needed a vast database of examples set up just for Shakespeare alone.
I'll not rest until I grab the working essentials of how this thing
works; call it a program, call it an algorithm, call it what the hell
you want, but I want to know how it produces its stuff.
The sort of things I've read so far are; "It has all the Internet at its call, and summons up vast resources". But that gives nothing away. If
you've ever had to write a computer program, you'll know that is true.
So, how does it do its stuff?
So, no, AI is not conscious. The more intriguing question
for me is whether it's possible for humans to be conscious. :)
You can't argue than an AI is not conscious while at the same time asking whether humans are conscious.
I thought I'd have a laugh, so I asked ChatGPT for a sonnet in the style
of Shakespeare. What it gave me has caused me to gulp with astonishment.
It looks pretty good to me; maybe a little more modern English than >Elizabethan, but, still, it has a spark; as well as good iambic
pentameters and rhymes.
Newyana2 wrote:
On 4/8/2025 2:07 PM, Ed Cryer wrote:
How does the program do that?
I used to earn my daily bread programming commercial mainframes. But
this AI "in the style of" beats me. I've done Walt Whitman, Louis
Carroll, William Wordsworth and others; and all win my praise.
And that's only one facet of the AI phenomenon.
I'd have needed a vast database of examples set up just for
Shakespeare alone.
I'll not rest until I grab the working essentials of how this thing
works; call it a program, call it an algorithm, call it what the hell
you want, but I want to know how it produces its stuff.
The sort of things I've read so far are; "It has all the Internet at
its call, and summons up vast resources". But that gives nothing away.
If you've ever had to write a computer program, you'll know that is true. >>>
So, how does it do its stuff?
As a programmer you know that it's all math. It's all
calculations on an abacus. It just gets increasingly complex.
The marketers say they've lost track of how it's working
and that must be intelligence and blah, blah, blah. But it's
still all just binary data and math calculations.
So how do they make these things up? They copy billions
of lines of data and look for patterns. Notice that your poem
includes lots of cliches strung together. They mostly don't
make a lot of sense. But they come close and we read
into it.
So how COULD they do it? There's only one way: To gather
data and compare it in various ways, then synthesize new
combinations. That's math, just like any other computer
operation. You might download porn of a naked woman with
an amazing ass and go into a long fantasy about having a
relationship with her. Would it matter whether that woman
exists or whether it's an AI production? What you're enjoying
is a bitmap recording of RGB pixel values, projected on a
screen. There's neither a real woman nor an AI picture there.
There's a data stream of numeric values interpreted as
RGB pixel colors. The rest is in your mind.
I think that's the interesting thing about people who talk
about tests for consciousness. We'll know a computer is
conscious if it can make a human think it's conscious. But
that assumes the human is conscious. What is conscious?
If I always stop at Dunkin Donuts for a chocolate donut
when I pass by, is that conscious? If I give my life savings
to a woman who says she loves me, is that conscious? How
about if I decide an AI is conscious and empathetic because
it seems to like me?
So, no, AI is not conscious. The more intriguing question
for me is whether it's possible for humans to be conscious. :)
There's logic, and then there are emotions. They are different categories.
If a mind were to conclude "I'm wrong here; I don't belong"; then logic
might suggest "Switch off". But emotion would fight against that.
Dostoevsky put it well; "A man would stay alive on a shelf, rather than
end it voluntarily"; and then there's Hamlet's famous soliloquy about
the bourn from which no traveller returns.
That's the passage from bit-brain to humanity; and consciousness. We are
not just logic. And how can emotions be produced from digital
processing? How can you import fear and love into mathematics?
In humans the emotions came first; long, long before the logic and
reason. Those qualities dawned in our species much later.
Now, with AI we are vice versa. They are the products of reason. So
whence cometh the emotions? Whence will come will to survive at all costs?
Ed
I'm not a scientific materialist. I regard it as a thoroughly
untenable way to look at the nature of experience. Science
can't accept mind or even life as such, because those things
can't be measured empirically.
I mean there is a whole field of science looking at life and has done for hundreds of years - biology - so that's an odd take.
But if you accept mind as
a something not arising from matter,
Where else would it arise from?
That may seem odd at first, but look at what science posits:
Lots of atoms, over billions of years, accidentally ended up
as amino acids, then DNA, then complex, communal systems
of cells, which spend all of their energy on maintaining their
own integrity as distinct entities, which implies will. Yet it all
happened willy nilly. And the incredibly complicated balance that
maintains these living systems is also happening by accident.
None of what you describe is an "accident". We simply cannot fathom the
power that billions of years has.
Further, if that's the case then we're
simply accidental bio-robots and thus have no capacity to
reflect on these things in the first place.
And yet we do and have done for millennia.
I mean there is a whole field of science looking at life and has done for >>> hundreds of years - biology - so that's an odd take.Yes. Most people would think so. Yet the idea of mind
arising from matter is fairly new. We say that we recognize
mind and life, but what's studied empirically is just matter.
That's why the DSM is a book of symptoms.
DSM?
What's
schizophrenia? What's awareness? What's OCD? e describe
it as symptoms. If you display enough symptoms then
your insurance will pay for a happy pill prescription.
Not here. We don't do insurance ;)
More
recently we talk in terms of fMRIs and neurotransmitters.
But what science CAN theorize or know is limited to what it
can arrange a repeatable experiment for.
False.
Darwin's theory was completely untestable at the time. He also had no idea about genetics, DNA or molecular biology. All discoveries since have confirmed and strengthened the scientific basis for evolution.
We may even discover what there is beyond our universe. If anything.
I don't see why "mind" should be seen as distinct from science. They are complementary and interdependent.
This is the beauty and strength of the
scientific method. It is objective.
I thought I'd have a laugh, so I asked ChatGPT for a
sonnet in the style of Shakespeare. What it gave me has
caused me to gulp with astonishment. It looks pretty good
to me; maybe a little more modern English than
Elizabethan, but, still, it has a spark; as well as good
iambic pentameters and rhymes.
When twilight falls and paints the skies with gold,
The stars emerge, as whispers of the night;
If you believe in scientific materialism then you might
believe that consciousness is an emergent quality, arising
from chemical reactions in the brain.
Newyana2:
If you believe in scientific materialism then you might
believe that consciousness is an emergent quality, arising
from chemical reactions in the brain.
Is this compatible with us perceiving our own consciousness
and being able to discuss it, which means it is casually
active?
Do you mean strong (aka miraculous) emergence, or weak
emergence? IMHO, the weak variety is out of the question:
chemmical, electrical, and other material processes can
produce only other material processes, but not feelings,
emotions, qualia...
On 4/17/2025 6:40 PM, Anton Shepelev wrote:
Newyana2:
If you believe in scientific materialism then you might
believe that consciousness is an emergent quality, arising
from chemical reactions in the brain.
Is this compatible with us perceiving our own consciousness
and being able to discuss it, which means it is casually
active?
Do you mean strong (aka miraculous) emergence, or weak
emergence? IMHO, the weak variety is out of the question:
chemmical, electrical, and other material processes can
produce only other material processes, but not feelings,
emotions, qualia...
I don't support either premise. Do we perceive
consciousness? That seems questionable. "I think,
therefore I am" is a desperate grasping at ground,
not an observation.
Do we perceive consciousness? That seems questionable.
"I think, therefore I am" is a desperate grasping at ground,
not an observation.
On 4/8/2025 11:26 AM, Ed Cryer wrote:
 I'll be happy when the AI craze blows over,
leaving
a light of blessed clarity, replacing fake intelligence's
winding maze, and let me just say eternal and true
love and all that good stuff.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 508 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 233:03:24 |
| Calls: | 9,984 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 13,833 |
| Messages: | 6,359,841 |