That is a fun experiment which can be interesting applied to all sorts of things.
Imagine being captain of a ship and using the same AI with different profiles as background. E.g. what's your opinion on data based on a geologist profile, vs. a profile based on some other profession...
I imagine the best way to do this will be whatever quickly evokes a large amount of highly-correlated tokens for the kind of fictional character the user wants to see in the story.
In other words, the completeness or scientific rigor of the original categorization and naming is irrelevant, compared to its consistency and presence in the training data.
In some cases, the most straightforward approach might be to name a particularly popular character by name.
That is a fun experiment which can be interesting applied to all sorts of things.
Imagine being captain of a ship and using the same AI with different profiles as background. E.g. what's your opinion on data based on a geologist profile, vs. a profile based on some other profession...
this is fantastic. Really interesting to see which signs decided what.
[flagged]
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
"Don't be curmudgeonly. Thoughtful criticism is fine, but please don't be rigidly or generically negative."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I somehow assumed this was going to be about the Zodiac killer and was really confused.
I don’t see the point of using zodiacs. Might as well use any kind of personality test like Myers-Briggs.
I imagine the best way to do this will be whatever quickly evokes a large amount of highly-correlated tokens for the kind of fictional character the user wants to see in the story.
In other words, the completeness or scientific rigor of the original categorization and naming is irrelevant, compared to its consistency and presence in the training data.
In some cases, the most straightforward approach might be to name a particularly popular character by name.