[umanwizard]

The article if written by a human was bad -- poorly argued and trite.

However, my mind is blown if it really was written by an AI. As bad as it might seem by human standards, it's almost impossible for me to accept that this was created by an entity without consciousness or at least understanding.

Edit: it seems this might be a fraud; i.e., it indeed was produced by an entity with consciousness. I almost hope that’s true, as it’s much less unsettling.

[not2b]

It is stringing together phrases and sentences that appear in the training data. After digesting gigabytes of text, it has built up structures that represent grammar and semantics to some degree, so you'll find very coherent sentences, because those sentences were originally written by humans or pasted together from sentences written by humans. It's amazing that it works as well as it does.

[umanwizard]

I disagree. The essay in question develops a coherent argument over several paragraphs. It’s not just disjointed individual sentences.

The argument about overthinking vs creative thinking isn’t particularly _great_, but it’s certainly intelligible.