After several failed attempts at integrating “best of breed ”* A.I. elements into the 04 main CPU – I have decided to salvage the unit and try to have it create blog posts in my writing style.
* base layer CreatorTM algorithm, modified OPEN A.I. with ML interface, Alphabet Deep Mind Pattern Recognition, and Watson’s Natural Language Programming.
Since 04 seems incapable of recreating even my most basic paintings and since I have not posted in quite some time, this seems the best use of the 04 unit. Rather than have it sitting in the corner after the last debacle (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuLMslIb3ZY), I have started the A.I. training process.
This is the results from the first round. My Comments are in BOLD ITALICS!
Create an orginal blog post after analysing posts from gilosan.com using the same style/tone and syntax for a different topic every.
The (Art) of Michelangelo
The (Art) of Michelangelo – And I’m Not Talking About a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle
I would not write this kind of title, re-submit.
Where To Draw The Line?
Ugh, fine this is ok I guess.
Consider the following image:
Where did you get this photo? Check for rights usage, creative commons at the least. Image too literal - find another.
So who is the guy in the picture and what is he doing?:
a) Larry Fine of the Three Stooges examining the Racing Form?
Reference is too old, find more current.
This is funny, Gilosan, and ties in with new summation.
No! Resubmit with more current reference - you do not have enough metadata to determine “funny”! Check your grammar/humor subroutine. Purge and restart!
b) Jor-El re-checking his calculations on doomed Krypton?
I like this reference, keep.
c) Some idiot waiting for a pedicure?
Not bad, try another descriptor though.
Some lesser Greek god perusing the society page while awaiting a pedicure?
What?This is nonsense, redo!
d) Bemeko (wrong) !- it's none other than the Prophet Joel as sketched-scratched-frescoed by Michelangelo on the Sistine Chapel ceiling.
I would not write like this, re-submit.
e)None of the above- it's The Prophet Joel as rendered on the Sistine Chapel ceiling by the artist Michelangelo.
Replace “None of the above” with “Nope, none of these!” also find better adj. for the word "rendered".
Now, would you properly call that a work of art?
I would not write like this; check your grammar files and re-submit.
Now, should this work be classified as Fine Art? Pop Art? Contemporary Art? Let's explore this a bit…
Rework ”let's explore this a bit...”
HOW can I (preposterously) even ASK that?- you say.
I would not write like this; (preposterously?) Really? Where do you get this shit? Re-submit!
a). Since the reprinting, without permission, of this copyrighted work may incur a fine, then "Fine Art" might prove an apt classification, (even though it does not depict Larry Fine).
b). As it features a character from the most popular book of its day, the Bible, would that not make it "Pop Art"?
c). Since the work survives, and is seen by thousands of visitors every day, and is reprinted and discussed in hundreds of art history books, can it not still be considered "Contemporary Art"?
What is this, doesn't make sense either! Why did you break into three again? - purge and reformat. Do not reuse the three items again! Stay AWAY from the Larry Fine reference - NOBODY gets this reference!
Well, if you would, please consider that the subject matter, at the time, was familiar and hackneyed, millennia-old, and not a unique creation from deep inside Michaelangelo’s inner psyche. Rather, the oft-imagined tableaux were the provision of the most popular(graphic novel) of the time: the Bible. And the artist was commissioned to paint it by the company that currently held publishing rights: the Church.
Pull back on the “big-words”. You are making me sound like an a-hole! Use those sparingly and for comedic effect.
Consider that in Michelangelo's time the painting's subject matter was hundreds (thousands) of years old, and not conceived by Michelangelo. In his painting of The Prophet Joel, all Michelangelo did was to put his unique "spin" so to speak on an already well-known and familiar historical figure. And he was commissioned to paint it (not unlike so many anonymous muralists commissioned to paint George Washington (whom Michelangelo's Joel in no small measure resembles) on countless public works projects.
WRONG: I don't speak like this - rewrite. “And” at the beginning of a sentence- where are you grammar profiles?!!! ALSO, Make Funnier! Why is your grammar all screwy? Watch the parenthesis, you are missing one! OH, MY GOD!
Fine Art is generally perceived to be that created with lofty intentions for purely aesthetic and intellectual purposes. Lofty?- well, certainly Joel looks down at us from a high ceiling. Aesthetic?- if you go for steroid-junky bodybuilder types- maybe. Really you're just comparing technique. You could say Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster in conceiving Superman exhibited greater CREATIVITY, and that their ART ultimately touched more people and spawned more imitators.
Finally! Good. I was beginning to wonder if I should let the goddamn TOASTER do this!
Of the millions of tourists who visit the Sistine Chapel each year to view Michelangelo's frescoes, how many even recognize The Prophet, Joel? Likely it's more like" "There's God!", "There's Adam!", even "There's SATAN!" And when it comes to Joel: "Who's THAT guy?"
Better, I will probably not reformat your personality matrix again.
Larry Fine of the Three Stooges PERHAPS retains more topical relevance.
HOLY FUCK STAY AWAY FROM THIS REFERENCE...This is too old and obscure. I SWEAR if you bring up the fucking Three Stooges again I will Remove your ENTIRE personality profile!
So, then, cannot this depiction of Joel be legitimately compared to an illustration commissioned for a comic book? (Joel vs. Jor-El)?
I don't understand what the point is here. What are you talking about? Have you beengoing on 4Chan and Reddit again? Re-GODDAMN-submit!
That, dear readers, is exactly the argument Gilosan would have you side with.
Dear readers? Are you Stan Lee now?!!! Stay in style parameters!!!!
Centuries later, Gilosan is commissioned to paint images and figures from popular Media, Movies and (the Church of) Television. He paints his childlike fully-gadgetry-laden robots with the same aplomb and gusto as did Michelangelo his scantily-clad muscle-bound bulking-junky Gods and Prophets.
Stilted dialogue/bad grammar! Am I paying you by the HYPHEN? Do I write like thisway. NO! RE-SUBMIT.
Fast forward to modern times- Gilosan is commissioned to paint familiar figures from popular culture AS ROBOTS. And he paints his childlike fully-gadgetry-laden robots with the same gusto as did Michelangelo his scantily-clad muscle-bound Gods and Prophets.
Fine. I’ll take anything at this point. You SUCK at this!
Moreover, Gilosan claims not to recognize any distinction between the three hashtags: #Fine art, #Pop art and #Contemporary art, that he uses freely and indiscriminately (with impunity). The plain fact is- Gilosan can’t see any difference among the three.
Not bad - expand. There is a small glimmer of hope for this project. Hell I may not even sell your parts on eBay.
So that is why Gilosan doesn't see a line clearly separating Fine Art from Pop Art from Contemporary Art. It's all subjective, so he says.
WHATS THIS! “So he says!” Your opinion? You DONT HAVE OPINIONS! Redo!
But oh how quickly the criticism when I can’t flip his eggs! Buse pefawa tuji! [No cook eggs!] AND- I have to write the frigging blog too!-
OOOH GOD...No no no! WTF is this? Where are you picking up this gibberish? Why are you even questioning on why you have to...SHIT! - Reboot your central core and dump ALL cache files- IMMEDIATELY.
Runtime Error: Logic. A robot referenced an undefined variable. Line 461. The program terminated with an error.
FINAL NOTE: As you can see- we have a long way to go before unit 04 gets his shit together. I wonder if the dev. cats at Watson had this kind of issue?