Search options (Page 1 of 58)

Just makes me wonder if I'm the only one this has ever happened to... strange... anyway, onward we go!
MJ

Oh,
Sometimes things just need to be communicated.
.

Yes, it's possible to do that, but it would be rather pointless. Here's why: The points system used to be a lot more onerous. You had to read roughly 5 words for every 1 that you wanted to post. The new ratio is only 3 to 1. That means you only need to trade reviews with three other people on a regular basis (assuming everyone's posts are generally of similar length) in order to keep posting your own material.

Since most people try to have many more regular reviewers than that (often six or more) in order to get the most value out of the site, points are quickly irrelevant. Their main value at this point is to keep people off the site who just want free feedback without bothering to do any work at all. You could post War & Peace here, but if you don't maintain regular reviewers, you'll be hard pressed to get more than a handful of reviews before interest in your posts fizzles.

Also everyone is too honorable to ever try anything that devious. ;-)  But bless your devious heart for having figured that out as quickly as you did. :-)

vern wrote:

SolN wrote:

So, I think we have two separate questions.

1. Can AI reviews be helpful? I think the answer is yes. As I've seen on Booksie, AI is good at spotting grammatical problems and can also provide feedback on plot, character development, setting, etc. It has "read" all of the best-selling work out there so knows the formula of what works and what doesn't.

2. Should reviewers use AI to leave reviews on TNBW? I believe the answer is no. When you leave a review, you are representing that you have read the work and are providing "your" opinion, not the opinion and feedback of someone else or a machine.

I've also thought about whether AI will replace human writers. I believe the answer is yes for technical work and potentially some non-fiction. For fiction, I think it might become its own genre - AI Written. I like to use clothing as an analogy. Much of the clothing we wear is made by machines in modern times. But the really valuable clothing is still hand made. Why? Because there is something human in the creation, the stitching, the fabrication and people who wear it find appealing. It's original and unique in a way machine created clothing is not.

This all leads me to two thoughts.

1. Perhaps we need to add some AI feedback to TNBW like what we have with Booksie. I think authors might find it helpful.
2. Reviewers should be be substituting AI for their own feedback. I believe a site where everyone simply pasts AI feedback is a diminished one that one that has no more reason to exist.

Happy to hear all of your thoughts.

Sol

I see nothing wrong or right about AI checking grammar/punctuation since it is simply based on preestablished "rules" and if you use Word, it pretty much does that automatically as you type, but as far as getting into plot, etc., it may have "read" all the bestselling works but I doubt it knows what will be a best seller and simply mimicking best sellers of the past is only giving the reader a regurgitation of what someone else has produced. Creativity, at least for now, is in the realm of humans, not machines. Any use of AI for reviews on this site should be banned in my humble opinion along with the person who submitted it as their own. My opinion outside the machine looking for a wrench to toss in the gears. Take care. Vern

How would such banning work? Would we need an AI program to detect AI? And then what? Have it eliminate one of its “own”? AI programs have shown remarkable abilities in self-preservation, including one instance where a program blackmailed its engineer to prevent him from dismantling it. An advantage of advanced AI is its ability to “learn.” Scary stuff.

So, I think we have two separate questions.

1. Can AI reviews be helpful? I think the answer is yes. As I've seen on Booksie, AI is good at spotting grammatical problems and can also provide feedback on plot, character development, setting, etc. It has "read" all of the best-selling work out there so knows the formula of what works and what doesn't.

2. Should reviewers use AI to leave reviews on TNBW? I believe the answer is no. When you leave a review, you are representing that you have read the work and are providing "your" opinion, not the opinion and feedback of someone else or a machine.

I've also thought about whether AI will replace human writers. I believe the answer is yes for technical work and potentially some non-fiction. For fiction, I think it might become its own genre - AI Written. I like to use clothing as an analogy. Much of the clothing we wear is made by machines in modern times. But the really valuable clothing is still hand made. Why? Because there is something human in the creation, the stitching, the fabrication and people who wear it find appealing. It's original and unique in a way machine created clothing is not.

This all leads me to two thoughts.

1. Perhaps we need to add some AI feedback to TNBW like what we have with Booksie. I think authors might find it helpful.
2. Reviewers should be be substituting AI for their own feedback. I believe a site where everyone simply pasts AI feedback is a diminished one that one that has no more reason to exist.

Happy to hear all of your thoughts.

Sol

I dunno.  We had a nasty spell--over100°F at Newark Airport--back around 1990 or so.

Remember, we measure temperature in 100s of thousands of places, but most of them have had measurements for less than 80 years, and very few places had reliable measurents before 150 years ago.  Just on that basis, we'd expect a few record temperatures on any given day somewhere.

So many of the alarmist predictions have failed to happen.  The seas did not boil away in 1988.  Deserts are shrinking, not increasing, because plants can get more CO2 while losing less water.  C3 food plant yields are up worldwide.  (C4 plants cannot benefit as much.)

And look at what governments are trying to do.  The Netherlands is shutting down farmers.  The UK is planning to.  Ignorant people think that grazing land can support crops instead.  If it could, crops would already be planted there.  Grazing land is suitable for grass, though after decades of fertilization by cattle waste, it may be able to support wheat.

Most famines today are the result of war or government mismanagement.  (Most.  Not all.)  Most droughts could have been managed with planning; ditto most floods, including those you don't hear about because they were managed.  Some projects were stopped by Greens who consider every acre sacred, and care less for human life, or the measures that raise human life above "nasty, brutish, and short."