Hacker News Reader

The selection of human poets is cooked to give the result they wanted. I will grant the authors may have lied to themselves. But I don't think honest scientists would have ever constructed a study like this. It is comparing human avant garde jazz to AI dance music and concluding that "AI music" is more danceable than "human music", without including human dance music! It's just infuriating.

View on HN

They expressly state the result is likely because the AI poetry was more simple and direct than the poetry selected, which is more accessible for the average person not interested in poetry. They compare and contrast this with other studies where this was not the case.

Yes, it's comparing apples and oranges; that's the whole point. It doesn't make the experiment itself flawed.

It seems to me that the whole study was intended to manufacture a result to grab headlines. Scientific clickbait. It doesn't matter how transparent they are, because that is mostly there to cover their asses.

Hum, but it should have compared against human poems that go for a similar style no? Otherwise, it doesn't tell us much, except that AI was not able to make more complex poems? And maybe that people who don't like poetry when asked prefer simpler poems?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com