Monday Inspiration: (April 2023): The limitations of ChatGPT, the Age of Average and cultural homogenisation
It’s been difficult to avoid the hundreds, if not thousands, of AI articles, thought-pieces and practical guidance over the last few months. Although I’ve enjoyed many of these, and included a link to another one below, I also sympathised with Mark Ritson’s point that we shouldn’t be distracted from the fundamentals and Tom Fishburne’s warnings to slow down our approach to AI:
There seemed to be a connection between three of my favourite articles from March. I hope you find them equally interesting and thought-provoking:
This thoughtful, detailed and accessible perspective on ChatGPT and AI from Ted Chiang (who is incidentally the author of the source text of one of my favourite films) cut through all the noise.?
Within the article Ted Chiang explains the mechanics of ChatGPT and uses the analogy of ‘lossy’ compression to illustrate the way in which the large language model offers only an approximation of the web. It’s why ChatGPT sometimes ‘hallucinates’ (provides nonsensical answers) and cannot provide accurate answers to questions like “what is “245 + 821,” (despite ingesting a vast amount of information, it hasn’t been able to derive the principles of arithmetic).?
Ted Chaing also explains why AI tools like ChatGPT is not a substitute for human creativity:
“If you’re a writer, you will write a lot of unoriginal work before you write something original. And the time and effort expended on that unoriginal work isn’t wasted; on the contrary, I would suggest that it is precisely what enables you to eventually create something original. The hours spent choosing the right word and rearranging sentences to better follow one another are what teach you how meaning is conveyed by prose. Having students write essays isn’t merely a way to test their grasp of the material; it gives them experience in articulating their thoughts. If students never have to write essays that we have all read before, they will never gain the skills needed to write something that we have never read.”
This is a fascinating exploration of the homogenisation of so many aspects of our lives, from? art and architecture, to cars, media and even the way we look:
领英推荐
It’s scary to see just how conformist we have become, rejecting distinctiveness for the safety of sameness. For anyone interested in advertising and the principles of brand building, consider the rise of ‘blanding’, where advertising, brand identities and taglines have become more and more alike.?
Yet this trend offers us all hope. As Alex Murrell says at the end of the essay:
“But it’s not all bad news.
I believe that the age of average is the age of opportunity.
When every supermarket aisle looks like a sea of sameness, when every category abides by the same conventions, when every industry has converged on its own singular style, bold brands and courageous companies have the chance to chart a different course. To be different, distinctive and disruptive.”
Data and analytics form a key part of our lives as marketers. Developing a detailed understanding of what works, what doesn’t and where improvements can be made to the marketing mix is crucial. Yet the ‘analytics revolution’, which has brought success to many industries and sectors, also brings threats.?
As Derek Thompson explains, when analytics is used to such a degree that everything is treated like an equation (optimised for Y, solved for X), there is a danger that universal strategies can lead to a more homogenous product. Across film, sport and music, there has been a gradual trend towards ‘sameness’ (consider the same type of songs in the top 40 or the ubiquity of Marvel blockbusters and sequels in the cinemas).?
We need to find the right balance between art and science when making decisions:?
“Cultural Moneyballism, in this light, sacrifices exuberance for the sake of formulaic symmetry. It sacrifices diversity for the sake of familiarity. It solves finite games at the expense of infinite games. Its genius dulls the rough edges of entertainment. I think that’s worth caring about. It is definitely worth asking the question: In a world that will only become more influenced by mathematical intelligence, can we ruin culture through our attempts to perfect it?”