返回首页

OscarSchwartz_2015X-_电脑会写诗吗?_

I have a question. 我有一个问题,
Can a computer write poetry ? 电脑可以写诗吗?
poetry:n.诗;诗意,诗情;诗歌艺术;
This is a provocative question. 这是个有争议的问题。
provocative:adj.刺激的,挑拨的;气人的;n.刺激物,挑拨物;兴奋剂;
You think about it for a minute , and you suddenly have a bunch of other questions like: 你稍微想一下, 脑海里突然就会浮现出很多其他的问题:
for a minute:一会儿; a bunch of:一群;一束;一堆;
What is a computer? 例如,甚么是电脑?
What is poetry? 甚么是诗?
What is creativity? 甚么是创造力?
But these are questions that people spend their entire lifetime trying to answer, not in a single TED Talk. 但这些问题, 很多人穷尽一生才能试着给出答案, 单单一场TED演说并不能回答。
So we're going to have to try a different approach . 所以,我们必须用不一样的方法,
approach:n.方法;路径;v.接近;建议;着手处理;
So up here, we have two poems. 上面这里有两首诗,
One of them is written by a human, and the other one's written by a computer. 其中一首是人类写的, 另一首是电脑写的。
I'm going to ask you to tell me which one's which. 我会让各位来分辨哪首是谁写的,
Have a go: 我们开始吧:
Poem 1: Little Fly / Thy summer's play, / My thoughtless hand / Has brush'd away. 1号诗:小苍蝇,夏天的嘻戏,我轻率的手,已挥走。
Thy:pron.你的; thoughtless:adj.轻率的;欠考虑的;考虑不周的;不顾及他人的;
Am I not / A fly like thee ? / Or art not thou / A man like me? 难道我,不是像你一样的苍蝇,抑或妳,是像我一样的人?
thee:pron.(第二人称单数的宾格)你;
Poem 2: We can feel / Activist through your life's / morning / 2号诗:我们可以感受到,激进派在妳每日生活的清晨出没
Activist:n.积极分子;激进主义分子;
Pauses to see, pope I hate the / Non all the night to start a / great otherwise (...) 暂且停下感受,那我憎恶的教皇并非每晚都能开始,一个伟大的其他可能...
pope:n.教皇,罗马教皇;权威,大师;
Alright, time's up. 好的,时间到。
Hands up if you think Poem 1 was written by a human. 认为1号诗是人写的请举手,
OK, most of you. 好的,你们大部分都是。
Hands up if you think Poem 2 was written by a human. 认为2号诗是人写的请举手,
Very brave of you, because the first one was written by the human poet William Blake . 你们很勇敢, 因为第一首诗是由诗人William Blake所写,
Blake:n.布莱克(英国作家);
The second one was written by an algorithm that took all the language from my Facebook feed on one day and then regenerated it algorithmically , according to methods that I'll describe a little bit later on. 第二首诗是由一个演算法所写出来的, 这里所有的文法是从我脸书里一天灌进去的, 然后,用演算法重新制作出来的, 关于方法我稍后会提到一些。
regenerated:adj.再生的;v.再生;革新(regenerate的过去式和过去分词); algorithmically:[计]在算法上; according to:根据,据说; describe:v.描述;形容;把…称为;画出…图形;
So let's try another test. 我们来做另一个测验,
Again, you haven't got ages to read this, so just trust your gut . 我再次说明,你不用花太多时间去读它, 所以,相信你的直觉。
gut:n.勇气;肠道;内脏;v.损毁内部;取出…的内脏;adj.非理性的;本能的
Poem 1: A lion roars and a dog barks . It is interesting / and fascinating that a bird will fly and not / roar or bark. Enthralling stories about animals are in my dreams and I will sing them all if I / am not exhausted or weary . 1号诗:狮吼,狗吠,鸟飞,却不吼也不吠,这真迷人且有趣吶 我梦里有着关于动物的迷人故事 如果我不筋疲力尽或疲惫不堪我会为他们歌颂。
roars:n.怒吼; barks:n.[林]树皮;狗吠(bark的复数);v.剥(树皮);狗吠(bark的三单形式); fascinating:adj.极有吸引力的;迷人的;v.深深吸引;迷住;(fascinate的现在分词) Enthralling:adj.迷人的;v.迷惑;奴役(enthral的现在分词); exhausted:adj.筋疲力尽的; v.使筋疲力尽; (exhaust的过去分词和过去式) weary:adj.疲倦的;厌烦的;令人厌烦的;v.疲倦;厌烦;使厌烦;
Poem 2: Oh! kangaroos , sequins , chocolate sodas ! / You are really beautiful! 2号诗:喔!袋鼠、亮片、巧克力苏打!你们真漂亮!
kangaroos:袋鼠(kangaroo复数) sequins:n.亮片(sequin的复数形式); sodas:n.碳酸饮料,果汁汽水;
Pearls , / harmonicas , jujubes , aspirins ! All / the stuff they've always talked about (...) 珍珠、口琴、枣子、阿斯匹林!全是他们一直提到的东西(...)
Pearls:n.珍珠;像珍珠之物;(pearl的复数) harmonicas:n.口琴(等于mouthorgan); jujubes:n.果胶软糖;枣子(jujube的复数); aspirins:阿司匹林; stuff:n.东西:物品:基本特征:v.填满:装满:标本:
Alright, time's up. 好的,时间到。
So if you think the first poem was written by a human, put your hand up. 如果你认为第一首诗是人写的, 请举手。
And if you think the second poem was written by a human, put your hand up. 如果你认为第二首诗是人写的, 请举手。
We have, more or less , a 50/50 split here. 我们这里大约是50/50比例,
more or less:或多或少; split:v.分离;使分离;劈开;离开;分解;n.劈开;裂缝;adj.劈开的;
It was much harder. 这题比较难一点。
The answer is, the first poem was generated by an algorithm called Racter, that was created back in the 1970s, and the second poem was written by a guy called Frank O'Hara, who happens to be one of my favorite human poets. 答案是, 第一首诗是一个名叫Racter的电脑演算法 在1970年所创造的, 第二首诗是一位叫Frank O*Hara的家伙写的, 他意外地成为我最喜欢的“ 人类诗人”其中之一,
Frank:adj.坦白的,直率的;老实的;n.免费邮寄特权;v.免费邮寄;
(Laughter)
So what we've just done now is a Turing test for poetry. 所以,我们为这首诗做了「图灵测试」。
Turing:n.图灵机(一种可不受储存容量限制的假想计算机);
The Turing test was first proposed by this guy, Alan Turing, in 1950, in order to answer the question, can computers think? 「图灵测试」在1950年,由Alan Turing做第一次发表, 是为了回答一个问题: 「电脑会思考吗?」
proposed:adj.建议的;推荐的;v.提议;建议;计划;求婚;(propose的过去分词和过去式)
Alan Turing believed that if a computer was able to have a to have a text-based conversation with a human, with such proficiency such that the human couldn't tell whether they are talking to a computer or a human, then the computer can be said to have intelligence. Alan Turing相信,如果电脑能够 和人类进行一场流畅的以文字交流, 结果让人无法分辨 对方是人还是一台电脑, 那么这台电脑可以被称呼为拥有人工智慧。
text-based:基于文本的; proficiency:n.精通,熟练;
So in 2013, my friend Benjamin Laird and I, we created a Turing test for poetry online. 所以在2013年,我的朋友Benjamin Laird和我, 我们创造了一个诗的线上图灵测试程式,
Laird:n.领主,地主;
It's called bot or not, and you can go and play it for yourselves. 叫做「bot or not」(是不是机器人), 你可以上线自己玩玩看。
But basically , it's the game we just played. 但基本上,它就是我们刚刚玩的游戏,
basically:adv.主要地,基本上;
You're presented with a poem, you don't know whether it was written by a human or a computer and you have to guess. 你会看到一首诗, 你不知道它是人写的还是电脑写的, 然后你必须猜一猜。
So thousands and thousands of people have taken this test online, so we have results. 好几千人已经在线上做测验, 所以,我们有一个结论,
And what are the results? 那结论是甚么呢?
Well, Turing said that if a computer could fool a human 30 percent of the time that it was a human, then it passes the Turing test for intelligence. Turing说如果电脑可以骗过30%的人, 那它就可以被当作人, 它就通过了图灵测试。
We have poems on the bot or not database that have fooled 65 percent of human readers into thinking it was written by a human. 我们在 bot or not资料庫里的诗集 已经骗过65% 的人, 认为里面的诗是人写的。
So, I think we have an answer to our question. 所以,我认为我们的问题有答案了,
According to the logic of the Turing test, can a computer write poetry? 根据图灵测试的逻辑, 电脑可以写诗吗?
logic:n.逻辑;逻辑学;逻辑性;adj.逻辑的;
Well, yes, absolutely it can. 是的,它绝对可以。
absolutely:adv.绝对地;完全地;
But if you're feeling a little bit uncomfortable with this answer, that's OK. 但,如果你觉得对这答案有点让你不太舒服, 也没关系,
If you're having a bunch of gut reactions to it, that's also OK because this isn't the end of the story. 如果你花了很多时间与它互动, 这也没关系,因为这还没完。
reactions:n.反应;回应;抗拒;生理反应;副作用(reaction的复数)
Let's play our third and final test. 我们来玩第三个最后一个测验,
Again, you're going to have to read and tell me which you think is human. 我再说明一下,你们要读完后, 告诉我哪一个是人写的。
Poem 1: Reg flags the reason for pretty flags. / And ribbons . 1号诗:红旗之所以漂亮除了红色,还有缎带
ribbons:n.绶带,丝带; v.用缎带装饰;
Ribbons of flags / And wearing material / Reasons for wearing material. (...) 旗上的缎带及耐磨的材质耐磨材料之所以(...)
Poem 2: A wounded deer leaps highest, / I've heard the daffodil 2号诗:受伤的鹿跳最高,我听见水仙在诉说,
wounded:adj.受伤的; n.伤员; v.使受伤; (wound的过去分词和过去式) leaps:n.跳跃,剧增,急变(leap的复数);v.跳跃;急速进步(leap的三单形式); daffodil:n.水仙花;adj.水仙花色的;
I've heard the flag to-day / I've heard the hunter tell; / 'Tis but the ecstasy of death, / And then the brake is almost done (...) 我今天听旗子说、我听到猎人说; 这是对死亡的狂喜,而伤害几乎已经造成(...)
ecstasy:n.狂喜;入迷;忘形;
OK, time is up. 好的,时间到。
So hands up if you think Poem 1 was written by a human. 认为1号诗是人写的请举手,
Hands up if you think Poem 2 was written by a human. 认为2号诗是人写的请举手,
Whoa, that's a lot more people. 哇!多很多人!
So you'd be surprised to find that Poem 1 was written by the very human poet Gertrude Stein . 你会很惊讶地发现, 1号诗由一位纯正的人类诗人Gertrude Stein所写的,
Stein:n.(容量约为一品脱的)啤酒杯;
And Poem 2 was generated by an algorithm called RKCP. 而2号诗是一个叫RKCP演算法所创造的,
Now before we go on, let me describe very quickly and simply, how RKCP works. 在我们要继续以前,让我简单快速描述一下 RKCP是如何运作的。
So RKCP is an algorithm designed by Ray Kurzweil, who's a director of engineering at Google and a firm believer in artificial intelligence . RKCP是Ray Kurzweil所设计的演算法, 他是一位谷歌的工程师主管, 也是一位人工智慧的坚定支持者。
engineering:n.工程;工程学;v.密谋策划;设计制造;改变…的基因;(engineer的现在分词) Google:谷歌;谷歌搜索引擎; believer:n.信徒;相信的人; artificial intelligence:n.人工智能;
So, you give RKCP a source text, it analyzes the source text in order to find out how it uses language, and then it regenerates language that emulates that first text. 那么,你给 RKCP一个来源文字, 为了找出要如何使用这个语言,它会分析来源文字, 然后,它会重新创造一段话来模仿源文字。
source:n.来源;水源;原始资料; analyzes:分析; regenerates:v.再生;恢复(regenerate的第三人称单数);更新; emulates:仿真;
So in the poem we just saw before, 所以,我们刚刚看到的诗,
Poem 2, the one that you all thought was human, it was fed a bunch of poems by a poet called Emily Dickinson it looked at the way she used language, learned the model, and then it regenerated a model according to that same structure . 你们认为是人类写的2号诗, 它被灌入了很多一位名叫Emily Dickinson诗人的诗, 它取用了这位诗人的语言, 学习她的模式, 然后它依据同样的结构重制一首诗出来。
structure:n.结构;构造;建筑物;vt.组织;构成;建造;
But the important thing to know about RKCP is that it doesn't know the meaning of the words it's using. 它不明白它自己用的文字意义,
The language is just raw material , it could be Chinese, it could be in Swedish , it could be the collected language from your Facebook feed for one day. 语言只是它的原料, 它可以是中文,瑞典文, 它可以是你脸书上一天的文字。
raw material:n.原料; Swedish:adj.瑞典的;瑞典语的;瑞典人的;n.瑞典语;瑞典人;
It's just raw material. 它就只是个原料而已。
And nevertheless , it's able to create a poem that seems more human than Gertrude Stein's poem, and Gertrude Stein is a human. 除此之外,它还有办法写一首 比Gertrude Stein写的还要更有人味的诗, 但Gertrude Stein才是人啊...
nevertheless:adv.然而,不过;虽然如此;conj.然而,不过;
So what we've done here is, more or less, a reverse Turing test. 所以,我们刚刚做的差不多就是,反向图灵测试。
reverse:n.反面; v.颠倒; adj.相反的;
So Gertrude Stein, who's a human, is able to write a poem that fools a majority of human judges into thinking that it was written by a computer. 所以Gertrude Stein这位人类, 可以写出让大部分人 误认为是电脑写出来的诗。
majority:n.大部分:大多数:多数票:成年人:
Therefore, according to the logic of the reverse Turing test, 所以,根据图灵测试的逻辑,
Gertrude Stein is a computer. Gertrude Stein这人是个电脑...(笑声)
(Laughter)
Feeling confused ? 感觉很困惑吗?
confused:adj.困惑的; v.使糊涂; (confuse的过去分词和过去式)
I think that's fair enough . 我认为这情有可原。
fair enough:同意或接受但有所保留;
So far we've had humans that write like humans, we have computers that write like computers, we have computers that write like humans, but we also have, perhaps most confusingly ,humans that write like computers. 目前为止,我们有人可以写出像是人写出的诗、 我们有电脑可以写出像是电脑写出的诗、 我们有电脑可以写出像是人写出的诗, 但我们同时也有会让我们搞混写诗像电脑的人。
confusingly:adv.confuse的变形:使困惑;使混乱;混淆;
So what do we take from all of this? 所以,我们从这裏面了解到甚么呢?
Do we take that William Blake is somehow more of a human than Gertrude Stein? 我们会认为William Blake 比Gertrude Stein更像是个人吗?
somehow:adv.以某种方法;莫名其妙地;
Or that Gertrude Stein is more of a computer than William Blake? 或者Gertrude Stein比William Blake更像是个电脑?
(Laughter) (笑声)
These are questions I've been asking myself for around two years now, and I don't have any answers. 这两年来, 我一直在问我自己, 但我没有任何答案,
But what I do have are a bunch of insights about our relationship with technology . 但我真的有领悟到很多有关于 我们与科技的关系。
insights:n.洞察力;眼力;深刻见解(insight的复数); technology:n.技术;工艺;术语;
So my first insight is that, for some reason, we associate poetry with being human. 所以,我的第一个领悟是, 为了一些原因,我们把人与诗结合一起,
associate:v.联合:联想:交往:adj.非正式的:副的:联合的:n.伙伴:同事:
So that when we ask, "Can a computer write poetry?" 所以,当我们问,"电脑会写诗吗?"
we're also asking, "What does it mean to be human and how do we put boundaries around this category ? 我们也在问, 人的定义是什么? 我们要如何界定、分类呢?
boundaries:n.边界;分界线;(boundary的复数) category:n.种类,分类;[数]范畴;
How do we say who or what can be part of this category?" 我们要如何分辨谁或是东西是归于哪一类?"
This is an essentially philosophical question, I believe, and it can't be answered with a yes or no test, like the Turing test. 我相信,本质上这是一道哲学的问题, 而且,这不是像图灵测试是个 对或错的测试,
essentially:adv.本质上;本来; philosophical:adj.哲学的(等于philosophic);冷静的;
I also believe that Alan Turing understood this, and that when he devised his test back in 1950, he was doing it as a philosophical provocation . 我也相信,Alan Turing在1950年发明这个理论时, 也了解这一点, 他当时引发了一个哲学上的争议。
devised:v.设计(devise的过去式和过去分词);计划;发明; provocation:n.挑衅;激怒;挑拨;
So my second insight is that, when we take the Turing test for poetry, we're not really testing the capacity of the computers because poetry-generating algorithms, they're pretty simple and have existed, more or less, since the 1950s. 我的第二个领悟是,当我们在为诗做图灵测试时, 我们并不是真的在测试电脑的能力, 因为用演算法作诗相当简单, 而且它们大约在1950年代早就已经存在了。
capacity:n.能力;容量;资格,地位;生产力;
What we are doing with the Turing test for poetry, rather, is collecting opinions about what constitutes humanness . 我们现在为诗做的图灵测试, 反而,比较像是在收集甚么是构成人性的条件。
constitutes:v.被算作;组成;构成;(合法或正式地)成立,设立;(constitute的第三人称单数) humanness:n.为人,为人的资格;人性;
So, what I've figured out, we've seen this when earlier today, we say that William Blake is more of a human than Gertrude Stein. 所以,我发现, 稍早我们今天看到的, 我们说William Blake 比Gertrude Stein更像个人,
Of course, this doesn't mean that William Blake was actually more human or that Gertrude Stein was more of a computer. 当然,这不代表 William Blake比较有人性 或者Gertrude Stein比较像电脑。
It simply means that the category of the human is unstable . 这只能单纯的说明,对人类的界定是不稳定的。
unstable:adj.不稳定的;变化莫测的;(行为、情绪)反复无常的
This has led me to understand that the human is not a cold, hard fact. 这让我明白了一件事, 就是人性不是冷的、死板的事实,
Rather, it is something that's constructed with our opinions and something that changes over time. 反倒是一种由我们的意见所构成的东西, 而这个东西会随着时间而改变。
constructed:v.修建;建造;组成;编制,绘制;(construct的过去分词和过去式)
So my final insight is that the computer, more or less, works like a mirror that reflects any idea of a human that we show it. 所以我最后的领悟是, 一面反映我们输入进去的人类思想的镜子。 我们向它展示Emily Dickinson,
reflects:v.反映;映出(影像);反射;表明,表达;(reflect的第三人称单数)
We show it Emily Dickinson,it gives Emily Dickinson back to us. 它仅是模仿Emily Dickinson给我们,
We show it William Blake, that's what it reflects back to us. 我们向它展示William Blake, 它就回应William Blake给我们的,
We show it Gertrude Stein, what we get back is Gertrude Stein. 我们向它展示Gertrude Stein, 我们得到的回应仅是Gertrude Stein。
More than any other bit of technology, the computer is a mirror that reflects any idea of the human we teach it. 还有其他更多的科技也是, 电脑只是我们教它甚么它就反应甚么的一面镜子。
So I'm sure a lot of you have been hearing a lot about artificial intelligence recently . 所以,我确定你们大部分人都曾听过 很多有关人工智慧的事情。
recently:adv.最近;新近;
And much of the conversation is, can we build it? 而大部分的对话就类似: 「我们该建造它吗?」
Can we build an intelligent computer? 「我们可以建立一个智慧型电脑吗?」
intelligent:adj.有才智的;悟性强的;聪明的;有智力的
Can we build a creative computer? 「我们可以建立一个创造型电脑吗?」
creative:adj.创造性的;
What we seem to be asking over and over is can we build a human-like computer? 我们一次又一次的被问到, 我们可以建立一个类似人类的电脑吗?
over and over:反复;再三;
But what we've seen just now is that the human is not a scientific fact, that it's an ever-shifting, concatenating idea and one that changes over time. 但就我们刚刚看到的, 人类不是一个科学事实, 人类是一个会不断地变化、串联想法、 随时间改变的物种。
scientific:adj.科学的,系统的; concatenating:v.把…连在一起;连接(concatenate的ing形式);adj.[植]连接的;
So that when we begin to grapple with the ideas of artificial intelligence in the future, we shouldn't only be asking ourselves, "Can we build it?" 所以,当我们开始要努力克服 未来人工智慧的这个想法时, 我们不应该只问我们自己, 「我们可以建造它吗?」
grapple:v.扭打;搏斗;努力设法解决;n.格斗;紧握;抓机;
But we should also be asking ourselves, "What idea of the human do we want to have reflected back to us?" 我们还得问我们自己, 「我们希望可以得到甚么样的人性回应?」
reflected:adj.反射的;得自他人的;v.反射;思考;(reflect的过去式和过去分词)
This is an essentially philosophical idea, and it's one that can't be answered with software alone, but I think requires a moment of species-wide, existential reflection . 这绝对是个哲学想法, 而且不是单靠软体就可以回答出来的, 但我认为,这需要一个各类物种共存的反应时刻,
existential:adj.存在主义的;有关存在的;存在判断的; reflection:n.反映;沉思;映像;深思;
Thank you. 谢谢各位。
(Applause) (掌声)