111–120 of 251 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you listen to an auto-generated podcast? Seems like removing the humans from the equation kind of defeats the purpose.
I would be interested in seeing an AI developed to listen to auto-generated podcasts, removing humans from the equation altogether.
> "Bad enough it has to talk, does it need fake vocal tics...?" - Gilfoyle
Found it: https://youtu.be/APlmfdbjmUY?si=b4-rgkxeXigU_un_&t=179
[1] https://illuminate.google.com/home?pli=1&play=SKUdNc_PPLL8
One problem I see with this is legitimizing LLM-extracted content as canon. The realistic human speech masks the fact that the LLM might be hallucinating or highlighting the wrong parts of a book/paper as important.
In this regard, LLMs are imperfect like ourselves, just to a different extent.
Did anyone else notice that according to the generation info, each recording was created on 12/31/69 at 4:00 PM?
Nothing is real anymore.
Why not, if you could also interject with questions, remarks, or "cut the chase" like remarks. Also it's weird that they focus only on AI papers in the demo, and not more interesting social stuff, like environment protection, climate change, etc
Why not, if you could also interject with questions, remarks, or "cut the chase" like remarks. Also it's weird that they focus only on AI papers in the demo, and not more interesting social stuff, like environment protection, climate change, etc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends on the what you are trying to get out of a podcast. Most of the podcasts I listen to are because I want to learn something new in an entertaining format. I'm not listening to develop parasocial relationships with the hosts, so removing that element could be a good thing for me. Of course if you listen to podcasts because you like the parasocial aspect or the celebrity interviews, then yeah... Not really a poi…
IMO, a lot of the best podcast content comes from a spontaneous tangent. You’d lose those moments with autogenerated podcasts.