[beej71]

> I once read Ben Franklin's autobiography. I have yet to experience any great blossoming of our relationship.

I've also read it, and got to know the man that much better. It especially added a great deal of texture to the experience of visiting his home site, his church, and his grave.

I'd argue that humans rarely have unique perspectives, being highly influenced by their environment and experience. And have we not seen AI coming up with novel math?

I don't think unique perspectives are necessarily the compelling part. I think the words are just a medium for thoughts. AI only produces the former, not the latter.

That's my relationship with Ben Franklin. It's not that I read what he wrote; it's that I know what he thought.

[mapontosevenths]

> I think the words are just a medium for thoughts. AI only produces the former, not the latter.

I think this is exactly what I was trying to say above when I talked about perspective Reading is a form of telepathy, and there's just nothing INSIDE of most AI writing today. When that changes, I'll take it more seriously. I do suspect that it will very soon though.

As you say, AI's are already coming up with novel math and I've seen some glimmers of purely mechanical brilliance in the writing already.

[slibhb]

When you read a book, you hypothesize a writer and have some kind of inner relationship with the hypothetical writer. But it's not a real relationship. It's in the words, not outside them.

[beej71]

I think the transmission through the medium makes the relationship with the other side.

One could certainly have a pen pal relationship where the only communication was via text. The relationship begins with the very first message.

Or a relationship with an autobiographer who spills their soul onto the page.

But if I look through the text of an AI spilling its soul, there's nothing on the other side.