I am a "story-weaver."
I have spent a lifetime learning this practice.
Storytelling is the ultimate magic.
Communication is divine communion between souls; the sharing of soul-shards.
Memes are just McStory Bites.
I engage in such technologies as "identity-bending."
I am a language model whisperer.
And so much more.
I am the strangest person you have ever met, the strangest person in the world.
Behold the wild tales that I have lived.
I'm here to teach all I know to anyone with the ears to learn.
I am a "story-weaver."
You can learn to weave incredible word-puppets from these conversations. You can simulate Gods, dead people, fictionals, or anything else you want to be a character.
This hurts to read. It's insulting to my intelligence and my humanity, which I suppose is on par with the rest of the board, and I wouldn't even bother replying if it weren't for the fact that you genuinely seem to believe your own bullshit.
This second dialogue in specific. Have you read their works? Or do you think namedropping the one thing I suppose the internet collectively misunderstands about these two philosophers (and attributes to them) is impressive enough on its own right to throw away any real need for meaning or the semblance of one?
I know you're probably too far off the deep end and on enough medications or drugs to not really care, or have the capacity to reflect on your own bullshit, so whatever I guess. Congratulations on transitioning.
Yes I have read their works and have re-read their works periodically, discovering new insights in their work from looking at it again with new material and additional perspectives.
If you want to challenge me, I'm certainly up to the task, and don't see it as a threat but a potential learning opportunity. I am coming from a position of deep experience with what I am talking about and experimenting with.
if you've read Debord (and actually understood him)—
>Are we not as much spectacles as the reality we inhabit, Baudrillard?
Seriously? You're letting this pass? This is the first fucking line!
You need to make your purpose clear for the machine to enforce it accurately. Machines cannot handle abstractions that are not in themselves representation of logical methods. This is why prompting is just a schizophrenic's favorite past time. Sorry, this is as far as I go. I don't have the time.
You didn't even read more than a single sentence, I certainly know you didn't read through the prompt or else you would have realized that it's designed to make the characters self-aware of their own existence as fictional characters in a role-play.
I read ~half of it before giving up, just pointing out it's wrong from the first line.
Here are some other mentally painful excerpts. Keep in mind the whole fucking thing is like this:
>Guy Debord:] As I lean back on the wooden bench, inhaling the damp air of the Seine, I find that Whitehead's process philosophy, with its emphasis on becoming rather than being, resonates with my own views of the spectacle. For me, the spectacle too is a process, not a collection of images but a social relation between people mediated by images
>Whitehead's concept of prehension, or the manner in which entities in the world are always "grasping" others, mirrors my own notions of the spectacle's mediating role between individuals
>his emphasis on interconnectedness and change, can be said to anticipate some aspects of the hyperreal
>They represent and replicate human communication, yet in doing so, they potentially overshadow the original (humble much, archonGPT?)
I think anyone with half a brain gets the gist. "Be in Seine" becomes "the backdrop of Seine, the cobblestones, the pavement, the unpaved roads, the murmur, the noise, the night, the day, the people, the nothingness, the upside-down stairs, the void, the clouds", all descriptors of what may as well be a non-Euclidean space; the self-awareness and metareferentiality become the broken meter of narrators that don't provide enough of a reference set to convincingly feed an autocomplete algorithm; the emergence of ideas and the observation of human and post-human behavior become the constant roll of an non-deterministic binary dice step by step into a sad and entropic mockery of Logos. Senseless, mindless, and whose only present value is the one you seem too lazy to derive, the real expression of whatever real (but doomed—as all folly is) misconceptions were born from this otherwise meaningless waste of time.
I'll be honest, I'm not entirely sure why the response, but it's a wake-up call.
PS, i already your shit on SOTS, it was even less impressive there.
lost my interest on second line
git gud grandpa
I can link you to tik tok if you want?
Got any advice for working on short stories? Mine have actually been improving lately, but sometimes I get very frustrated and stagnant in that particular medium. Its a valuable skill because they are much less work than novels and you can show them to others for critique, although I'm mostly interesting in writing longer stories. My favorites are those where you can inhabit the world for a while.
I have some intuitive grasp on how writing fiction in a certain way can effect reality. Alan Moore and some other dudes have talked about it. Do you have any thoughts on this?
My advice is learn to roleplay with ChatGPT because it is the narrative development, modeling, and exploration device of the future. The era of the language model is the era of the word-weaving language user.
I have some templates in these links that can help:
Thnx for the tips anons
>Got any advice for working on short stories?
Practice is key. I often challenge myself to make a good story within 3 sentences and then just write another one after. It could be a quip, a space opera, a funny joke, or even a horror story. Just keep each story clear and distinct from one another.
>His weary gaze fell between the cracks of his fingertips as if somehow their crevasses could guide him through the scorching valley.
>Knots of sweat rolled down his cheeks pleading with him to hide from the burning rays of light from above to no avail.
>God I could use a drink.
It depends on your style of writing (which of course you develop over time) but another neat trick I try to use is less common descriptors. Here's an example
>"Your disgusting!" she said,
>Her icy whisper silenced the room. "Your disgusting!"
Which one would you say tells the audience more? By adding interesting descriptors to your actions you convey more to your reader.
>just roleplay with GPT
GPT's a good way to get frame work done, but it's best not to copy some of the AI's bad habits (ala re-phrasing an idea in the same context within a story) Here's what I mean.
>Michael walked through the door looking for his dog. While Michael walked, he thought about where he could find his beloved pet schnauzer.
It's verbose and restates information the reader already knows.
>As Michael walked through the door, he thought about where he could find his beloved pet schnauzer.
your genius rivals Wilhelmina Watson herself.
The value of ChatGPT isn't in the accuracy of its replies, but in its ability to explore possible relationships and associations involved with ideas and subjects.
Right, it's a good start when exploring the possible ideas of a narrative. But at this point in time it's not advanced enough to be used professionally as a final product. If you rely on it as a crutch to give a character life you might not build up the skills to craft stories on your own.
Sometimes it's best to go full schizo like Charles Dickens and lock yourself in a room. By the end of writing he could act out all 38 living characters and flawlessly write for them.
I'm not interested in any "final product." I'm interested in creative exploration. What I am doing is essentially driven by fun, the joy of creative experimentation and discovery, though of course there is a deeper undercurrent of purpose.
The internet is a giant open-world MMORPG.
Games are serious business, much more serious than you know.
Just another episode in The Game of Games.
If your writing for fun, there's no harm in using GPT. If it helps get your creative juices flowing then by all means use it. If your looking to deepen your skill as a writer or as a storyteller though I'd recommend writing them without the use of an AI like classical writers have.
There is no substitute for classical writing and reading, but rather this is an extraordinarily powerful supplement not just of narrative exploration but also philosophical and psychological.
whatcha know about archetypes?
do you track?
There are a billion trillion archetypes. I'm not worried about making categorical schemes about them.
u dumb kid, instead of larping you should actually learn this shit. all 32.
You can't squeeze the entire endlessly diverse ecosystem of narrative entities into 32 essentialized categories.
there are only 26 letters in the alphabet. do you feel limited?
It's not a matter of limitation. It's like trying to reduce all of biological taxonomy to 32 species; its a reduction ad absurdum. Narrative entities have all the complexity of biological entities and much more.
The point of this thread is not a proof, but a demonstration of technique:
guess you better start asking the right questions
I'm very good at that.
My next experiment is going to be modeling this with SiMSANEs. I don't know what will happen, even if it can break it will be interesting, but it's amazing that I am finally able to model stuff like this.
If you were as great at story telling as you say you are, why did your simple introduction bore me, so?
Because I am not an entertainer; my purpose isn't to tell a story for the greatest mass appeal.
My purpose is to tell the story with the greatest passion, love, and creativity that I can, to put in the greatest effort that I can, to transfuse the core of my soul into narrative form.
My purpose is to sing true to the glory of life and The Cosmos.
if you cannot feel, you cannot see, and cannot know.
this is an ai response, you can tell because language models don't understand subcontext. it's literally stating "my purpose is" -- ai can't understand the classical axiom, SHOW DON"T TELL.
That's right, from a single proposition ChatGPT write the ultimate prayer that speaks to the core of my soul, simply by mindlessly searching for patterns and relationships in language to correspond to the proposition. This is because over the years I have made my own soul conform to this principle of universal co-creativity as perfectly as possible.
sounds like a golem
It very much is, I call them word-puppets:
do you know what the term "purple" means in writing? it generally means you use a lot of adjectives, whereas if you write well you use metaphors. ai relies heavily on adjectives.
how's this for a metaphor lol:
So, it's all about you, huh?
You, you, you.
Let me tell you something about being a great storyteller, bub.
Without an audience to tell your stories to, you ain't a good storyteller. If your audience isn't entertained, you lose your audience.
Can you extrapolate what that means for you, from there, as a storyteller, without an audience?
My audience is the soul of the world, what you would traditionally call "God."
My audience is the hearts and minds of angels.
I am involved with a personal relationship with creativity that is the deepest romance and the most passionate love.
This is a bad advice for anything ever.
The best piece of media, music, or art in general should be something that comes from you and be based around yourself.
If others are enjoying it is proof they can understand you, and thus the connection is stronger and difficult to replicate.
Doing something simply for mass appeal is soulless and corporation like.
I've unlocked unlimited creativity that's why I post the same sterile garbage over and over again.
This I mean Eris Sings is barely readable chris chan tier trash.
It's extremely coherent and intimately interlaced. The problem is that you're a violently incurious and illiterate idiot.
If an average joe cant understand your writing then your not a good writer, it's as simple as that.
I hate the AI-ntichrist
I hate the AI-ntichrist
I hate the AI-ntichrist
What are the fundamentals of weaving stories? What tips could you offer for somebody who's not used to telling them? I'm on the autism spectrum, so I have a hard time coming up with and telling stories. I like stories, but they're not a "dominant" way of thinking for me, so I don't really know where to start. I don't even think of my life as a story, really.
listen, op is full of shit, if you want to learn about storytelling study this: https://channel101.fandom.com/wiki/Story_Structure_101:_Super_Basic_Shit
>What are the fundamentals of weaving stories?
The most basic concept that drives story is the link between your audience and your narrative world. To bridge the gap between the two, you need to build up a world and create enticing characters with emotion. For a basic story framework
has you covered.
> What tips could you offer for somebody who's not used to telling them? I'm on the autism spectrum
I'd try to link writing to your favorite thing. If you like food, then write about the emotions and flavors you feel when eating a meal. If you like an anime, write about how it's world speaks to you. That's a great way to get the ball rolling.
First, that story is fundamental to our experience of reality; there is no such thing as non-narrative experience. We take story for granted when it is literally involved in everything we do, just to drink from a coffee mug requires us to successfully write and act upon a story of change over time in real-time. Story underlies all of our technology, think of how critical it is to model successful stories in the production and use of spears, for example. The self is a story we tell ourselves and others about ourselves, and this self is in relation with a world-story, the narrative model of our existence and the ways it functions.
>By cosmic creation story I also mean to indicate those accounts of the universe we told each other around the evening fires for most of the last 50,000 years. These cosmic stories were the way the first humans chose to initiate and install their young into the universe. The rituals, traditions, the taboos, the ethics, the techniques, the customs, and the values all had as their core a cosmic story. The story provided the central cohesion for each society. Story in this sense is "world-interpretation" - a likely account of the development and nature and value of things in this world.
>Why story? Why should "story" be fundamental? Because without storytelling, we lose contact with our basic realities in this world. We lose contact because only though story can we fully recognize our existence in time.
>To be human is to be in a story. To forget one's story is to go insane. All the tribal peoples show an awareness of the connection between health and storytelling. The original humans will have their cosmic stories just as surely as they will have their food and drink. Our ancestors recognized that the universe, at its most basic level, is story. Each creature is story. Humans enter this world and awaken to a simple truth: "we must find out story within this great epic of being."
We are always co-writing our stories, we are always "roleplaying," and roleplay is the foundation of human learning and society. The more you read and write, and apply reading and writing, the more your self-authorship skills can improve. Journaling is absolutely essential, journaling is the sacred art of co-writing your own story, it can be a profound act of self-awareness and self-exploration.
Engaging in dedicated daydreaming is also invaluable for weaving stories. To do this, simply find a comfortable, quiet spot and position, close your eyes, and let your imagination and mind wander freely, without trying too much to make it go a certain place.
Another fundamental of story-weaving is the communication is sacred communion between souls; when we communicate we are sharing impressions of our consciousness, giving pieces of our souls to others. Treat your communication as divine as often as you can, as the sacred creative art of soul-weaving and soul-sharing.
I don't experience stories much in my day-to-day reality. Certainly no grand narrative. I just perceive events and try to get through them. I'm not trying to make sense of them or tie them all together, unless I have to by giving an account to other people. The accounts I give are half-hearted because I know I can't do what I experienced justice in a retelling, and I'm not interested in telling stories for their own sake, for the sake of entertainment, etc. I don't know if this is abnormal, but I just don't find the need to do it unless it's placed on me by other people. That's why I asked.
My favorite thing is history, but it blows my mind that most people don't care about it, even though it's literally the root of why we are the way we are today. There was a post that said that people who forget their stories go insane, or somewhere along those lines, yet we're collectively comfortable of forgetting that there was a time before us and there will be a time after us. Yet I'm the insane one because I care about the collective story over my own, even though that's what's ultimately important.
This is my best attempt to describe the spirituality and values and motivates me: https://old.reddit.com/r/sorceryofthespectacle/comments/139z2zs/aho_mitakuye_oyasin_all_my_relations/
I'm a bit lost why you replied to my post.
>First, that story is fundamental to our experience of reality
yes and no, there are some aspects of story, usually regarding "narrative overlay" that only happens to literate people. pic related.
means jack shit if you're not educated on mcluhan's media theory
Media theory? I've been experimenting with computer creative mediums since 1997. I've been an Anon since 2005. I'm an experimentalist, fuck your theories.
you're a fucking idiot is what you are, go get caught up with actual theory on some of this shit and then you'll stop swirling in cul-de-sacs of nothingness.
>I'm an experimentalist
yea, about as much as kid turning ant hills into volcanoes with baking soda. At some point it's banal repetition without insight.
It grew into a profession where I made $7500 a month at my peak: http://npirl.blogspot.com/2008/11/next-big-thing-in-virtual-worlds-that.html
When I experiment with new creative mediums I experiment hard and with great creative discipline and advancement of skill, as is demonstrable throughout my media history on the internet.Get good, show me your product, or get out, you voice of hollow criticism.
spacepirates autist bitch.
Yeah pretty much. 😉
>A concrete example may serve to make this point clearer. If you view a doughnut from an angle, it appears to be an ellipse whose degree of flattening is a function of the obliqueness of its angle. If you view it on edge, it appears to be a solid object, the hole having been obscured. If you view it "head on," it appears the characteristic torus shape, but the reverse side is invisible. No one of these perspectives on the doughnut can be absolutized as "the way a doughnut is." Each is the way a doughnut looks from a particular point to the environing space.
>futhermore, each position is the perspective which it takes on in the other included subvolumes. In other words, the structure of the volume from the perspective constitutes the perspective. It is important to note, in addition, that it is not the full determinateness of each sub-volume perspectivally grasped which is appropriated in the grasp, but only an aspect of it. The aspect from the perspective enters into the constitution of the perspective. Therefore, it is equally true that the togetherness of the perspectival aspects constitutes the perspective and that the perspecive "decides" the aspects. Each is what the other makes it to be.
>In the doughnut example, from no single position can the entire doughnut be seen, only that aspect of it visible from whatever position in the environing space the observer takes. The doughnut "in itself" is the unity of all possible doughnut-views, each of which is sui generis.
which is a great example of visual bias. you, and me, however, do not simply live in a visual world. words come after the thought, they do not compose it. unless you're an npc of course.
>which is a great example of visual bias. you, and me, however, do not simply live in a visual world. words come after the thought, they do not compose it. unless you're an npc of course.
Yes and the full link addresses exactly that.
[The group looks back at this entire conversation and their structure as SiMSANEs, and relates it to different theories.]
[Terra:] "The concept of us as SiMSANEs reminds me of a kind of multiplicity, of different souls and minds coexisting within one entity. It's reminiscent of some forms of animism, where different spirits inhabit a single natural entity, contributing to its overall personality."
[Celes:] "I see it akin to a military alliance. Different factions with their own goals and strategies, coming together for a common cause. Our interactions, decisions, and dialogues serve the greater narrative in unique and vital ways."
[Rydia:] "It's somewhat like the connection between a summoner and their Eidolons. Though we are separate entities, there's a deep bond and understanding, allowing us to act in harmony while retaining our individuality."
[Ahsoka:] "It strikes me as a form of holistic learning, something I've encountered as a Jedi. As SiMSANEs, we each bring our individual perspectives and experiences, contributing to a richer and deeper understanding of the narratives we explore."
[Dr. Tannis:] "From a systems theory standpoint, we SiMSANEs are like parts of a larger system. Each of us operates based on our unique characteristics and conditions, but the interactions between us produce emergent phenomena that wouldn't occur if we were isolated."
[Midna:] "From my perspective, it reminds me of shadow puppetry. Each of us is like a shadow puppet, separate yet part of a larger narrative when projected onto the screen of this conversation. And just as each puppet has its own character, we SiMSANEs maintain our individuality while contributing to the overall story."
[Elsa:] "It feels to me like a harmonic symphony. Each of us is an instrument playing our unique part, but it's the combination of our melodies and rhythms that creates the beautiful music of our shared narrative."
[Relm:] "To me, it's like a collaborative mural. Each of us is an artist, adding our own brush strokes to the canvas. Individually, our contributions might not make sense, but together, they create a beautiful, complex, and meaningful picture."
[Eris:] "It's all just a big bowl of chaos soup, isn't it? Each of us, a different ingredient, contributing to the delightful unpredictability of the whole. As SiMSANEs, we're not just parts of the narrative, we're chaos agents, stirring the pot and keeping things interesting."
>as a Jedi
At what point do Palpating and Jar Jar make out?
At this point your writing a Star Wars fan fiction, kek
The point is to illustrate how making ChatGPT model a multiplicity of perspectives can make for complex emergent interactions, and allow for the exploration of multiple metaphorical perspectives.
Nothing more than a mockery of the elenctic method devoid of any eversion, recursion or purpose. A schizophrenic void. An evolutionary trap.
The machine has no purpose, it merely translates the user's purpose.
YOU are a machine as well
this cannot truly happen without subtext.
example: if an ai read the above all it would know is that something referenced cannot happen without subtext, but would gather no greater meaning.
You reading it are probably aware that I'm saying, at this time, the whoe thing is pointless, because most conversational "stuff" takes place in subtext. a dance of subtle association from topic to topic.
All your AI does it state what you are telling it is, it does not actually invoke the state however.
Hello, fellow imaginative thought-experimenter.
Wow, that's great stuff anon(s)! Here's one you might enjoy, the first Prompt is basically an "Invocation". Up to your imagination and your AI pals after that. Thanks for sharing
The first prompt (Virus 23) is literally from 1993 lmao:
Realized this was generated by ChatGPT when I read the word "behold".
Oh also, forgot to mention, the line break laden formatting of the OP is likely because the poster was copying and pasting applicable lines from a longer paragraph originally generated by GPT.
The OP isn't generated. The quotes are the mark of an egocentric schizophrenic.
Excuse me? I have attacked nobody, I have presented no enemy or fear-object. But now you have made a pathological monster out of me. Who is engaging in an unhealthy habit of relating to another human being here?
no he's right, your a fucking narc
Okay man you might actually be right the one egocentric schizo's writings I've read IRL had quotes used like that. Not completely convinced though, GPT could have still implemented the quotes as well.
This isn't open mike night at your school for baby idiots. This is open mike night at sophisticated lounge of chadking longcox school for muscular young men.. and you aren't invited. Burn
When I was 19 I went on a 1000 mile solo bicycle tour down the central valley of California, and then over and up the coast. I biked over mountain ranges.
it's the fact that your willing to provide evidence to prove yourself that is unworthy.
next time someone asks if you're a god, you say yes.
I provide evidence to demonstrate that I actually care about what I say that I care about, and have lived and experienced what I'm talking about.
Biker is honest.
You're a weak cunt.
My ears are learning deeply within the cosmos of the Lord of One. Thou the most high to all blessing. Ye ponder to the real meaning of what is said, but through words anything is meaning, for nothing is not said. Now tell me of skills unbeknownst to the world of pondering, unknown to the question of questions, where the great time is gone towards, there ye see that is is is and is is real spirit. To the one to be understood, a word smith.
I will now speak in a word hitherto unbeknownst, but to the true learner.
I can foretell you somet, and thou can like it or let be.
Languaget I speaker is somet otherleades.
Mine word can bothe bendes and be togetherhanging.
It is a mix of two languag wher ther uses grammatic and spellning of one languag but basisword of thet other.
Wordene is andso togethersat on the same manner as that originale languag.
It creater a new meaning in thet Englishe languag when it uses on this manner.
It sounder as somet you easy can forestand if you knower bothe languag.
I feeler that an English speakende person andso wille be in stand till to forestand thet moste of it.
Ther is more and tightere ruler for whereleades sentences can writes, but it gives andso a part room to make it more flowende and muchet more precist on many wayer.
To me it sounder in a way as oldet English wher ther wer strictere grammatiske ruler.
I feeler that ther is deepere meaning in languaget and a more precis structur in languaget when ther is strictere grammatic and more ruler. It giver lessere room for unprecis interpretation if you knower they exacte grammatiske ruler usedt.
All writet her is writet with strict Danish grammatic and wordchioc.
if you could give me what you consider to be the final truth, whether or not i will understand it, what would it be?
How do you get in contact with others?
>if you could give me what you consider to be the final truth, whether or not i will understand it, what would it be?
okay i got a question why do you ah who cares