Suppose someone invented a really good Truth AI; it really spilled the beans
To the degree it could access information, it told the truth. It didn’t slant it.
There would still be a problem.
The way it wrote.
If the style is completely “informational,” it puts people to sleep. It caters to minds that are essentially data absorbers and processors.
It’s as if machines are talking to machines.
There’s no LIFE.
Actual human WRITERS are aware of this situation all the time.
Because the WRITERS don’t want to be The Living Dead. That’s why they’re WRITERS.
Whereas, for example, the New York Times makes a good sleeping pill. I can read a hundred words of a Times article before bed and conk right out.
Yes, writers certainly want the truth. They hunt for it. But they’re not AI.
I keep saying, in various ways, that the Age of Information is the Age of Machines.
Poets saw this phenomenon a few thousand years ago. They defined it differently, but they saw it.
They could see it because they were poets. Language for them was a magic carpet.
It still is.
