NoraReed / Nora Fleck / Nora Reed Heineman-Fleck and the Norasphere - The neverending fuck-ups of a sadistic thumb and tons of white knights

IMG_20170516_051424.png


:ow:
 
  • Winner
  • Feels
Reactions: Dynamite Ninja, BOLDYSPICY!, Portajohn and 1 other person
The idea that "making bad art" is necessary for people before they can "make good art" is so off-base. Most of the people who make their living from art/design or writing or playing an orchestral instrument started young, and were talented from the very beginning. Sure, a six year old's very by-the-numbers, derivative short story isn't exactly "good," but what it isn't is "bad." Same when a three year old who'll end up artistically talented draws a "picture of mommy" that has all her facial body parts and isn't a stick figure, and has a torso and four limbs, plus a filled-in background scene. If you didn't know the person was just getting started out in art and life, maybe you'd think it was bad, but for someone just starting, it's a clear expression of talent.

That's not how Nora's bots are. The reason people call her pathetic over the Mad Libs aspect actually goes to exactly this. If she was programming the bots herself, well, a reasonable number of decent programmers get started at around Nora's age, and a lot of their first programs are sort of useless dreck taken in a broader context but show talent and forethought that an actually untalented person wouldn't show. It's possible for experienced coders to understand from someone's early code whether they're struggling with the basics or showing promise.

How is anyone supposed to use Nora's sample "art" to understand the level of talent she believes herself to have? Would even a skilled editor be able to detect a talented writer from a filled-out Mad Libs book? Can an art professor judge academy admissions by a portfolio full of completed paint-by-numbers and coloring book pages?
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Cryonic Haunted Bullets, Trombonista, Dynamite Ninja and 8 others
The problem with Nora's bots is that they appear to be carefully tweaked give the "correct" answers. At first I thought they were extremely clever, but now they don't seem THAT different than someone who just typed in fully-realized phrases into a bot that automatically picks one at random.

I realize that's not what she's doing, but you would see far more "failures" in something like thinkpiecebot if it were truly generative.

The other issue is that Nora is NOT maturing in this area. She hasn't moved on to more sophisticated tools or ideas to deploy her bots.
 
  • Agree
  • Informative
Reactions: Dynamite Ninja, Hanamura, Army Burger and 6 others
Yeah, she's not. She's reached the apex of what you can really do with Tracery and we know she's not going to put time and money into hosting and learning a JavaScript stack so she can actually do anything more complex.

Waiting for the inevitable "my stalkers are mad" post again
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Dynamite Ninja, Feline Darkmage, Portajohn and 9 others
For all of Nora's talk of her bots, they're stale. They take one idea and ram it into the ground. She likes to speak of their followers, but they're both low and her individual tweets receive low likes and retweets. They're not relevant and have never received the attention the other bot and joke accounts have.
I usually just ignore her bot tweets because she has nothing interesting or useful to say on the subject. Her bots are nothing more than mad libs with no real thought or talent put into them.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Portajohn and Hellfire
D.Va said:
Yeah, she's not. She's reached the apex of what you can really do with Tracery and we know she's not going to put time and money into hosting and learning a JavaScript stack so she can actually do anything more complex.

Waiting for the inevitable "my stalkers are mad" post again
Click to expand...

That actually reminds me. Anyone who has experience with bots, drop me a line.

uswr15G.png


There's been a bot we've needed for some time on Twitter....
 
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: BOLDYSPICY!, Feline Darkmage, Dr. Boe Jangles Esq. and 1 other person
WeaponsGradeAutism said:
Nora REEEEEs at Marvel Comics.

View attachment 220982

C'mon, Nora. I know you hate facts. But Nick has done more in his life than you would manage until your inevitable fatal heart attack at 35 from being a fat blob and high blood pressure.
Click to expand...
It must be difficult sitting on your ass all day, finding ways to spend your father's money.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: BOLDYSPICY!, Dynamite Ninja, Portajohn and 3 others
flipper said:
The problem with Nora's bots is that they appear to be carefully tweaked give the "correct" answers. At first I thought they were extremely clever, but now they don't seem THAT different than someone who just typed in fully-realized phrases into a bot that automatically picks one at random.
Click to expand...

I still say "Cards Against Humanity" is a better comparison to Nora's bots. If you play CaH enough, you realize it's just a series of canned jokes that have been snipped apart, with various nouns offered as the object. Some combinations are funnier than others, but they're all pre-fabricated laugh lines. True randomness is no part of it. It gets boring real fast.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: BOLDYSPICY!, Dynamite Ninja, Portajohn and 2 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back