NotebookLM's automatically generated podcasts are surprisingly effective

Post by the8thbit » Mon, Sep 30, 2024, 2:39 PM UTC

low_tech_love wrote: post #297

rafram wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The one and only point listening to a discussion about anything is that at least one of the speakers is someone who has an opinion that you may find interesting or refutable. No. Maybe that's true for you , but people enjoy learning in different ways, and some people learn best by listening to a discussion.

Assuming you are one of them, I’m curious about one thing (honest question, not meant to disrespect): does it not bother you at all to know that those voices do not belong to any human being? When I listen to a semi-adolescent girl’s voice explaining something with a lot of “like”s and an informal tone, the fact that I know this was AI-generated makes me feel disgusted in my stomach (I am serious, this is not suppose…

Post by simonw » Mon, Sep 30, 2024, 2:41 PM UTC

freedomben wrote: post #313

humansareok1 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's definitely not nothing of value here. This could be a useful new medium. I however hate the tone of the two hosts. It sounds like two pompous millennials talking about things they don't really understand.

Indeed, you nailed it. The ridiculous overuse of the word "like" is as nails on a chalkboard to me. It's bad enough hearing it from many people around me, the last thing I need is it to be part of "professional" broadcasting. I'm super impressed with this, but that one flaw is a really big flaw to me.

Post by mistermann » Mon, Sep 30, 2024, 2:52 PM UTC

tkgally wrote: post #263

Inspired by this discussion, I had NotebookLM make three podcasts based on very minimal input: a one-line proverb, pi to 15 digits, and a short list of the most common words in English (“the of and to a in for is on that ...”). Here are the results: https://www.gally.net/temp/20240930notebooklmpodcasts/index....

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Sep 30, 2024, 3:00 PM UTC

cainxinth wrote: post #208

famahar wrote: post #105

I uploaded my detailed game design document for a project I've been working on in my free time and it was kind of a weird confidence boost. The two hosts seem to treat ideas like their the most insightful relevatory information they've ever heard. After a few uploads of other documents you start to notice the same overly surprised tone.

The prompt affects that a lot. If I input my writing and ask an LLM to “evaluate,” it will tell me how astute and intriguing my ideas are (often to the point of hyperbole). If I ask instead for it to “critique” me, I’ll get a much less complimentary response about the same content.

Post by richardw » Mon, Sep 30, 2024, 3:07 PM UTC

DanHulton wrote: post #254

richardw wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think and hope that you're wrong. There's always been cheese, and there's a lot of it now. But there is still a market for top-notch insight. For example, Perun. This guy delivers an hourlong presentation on (mostly) the Ukraine-Russia war and its pure quality. Insights, humour, excellent delivery, from what seems to be a military-focused economist/analyst/consultant. We're a while away from some bot taking this ki…

I keep seeing this asertion: "the robots will get there" (or its ilk), and it's starting to feel really weird to me. It's an article of faith -- we don't KNOW that they're going to get there. They're going to get better, almost certainly, but how much? How much gas is left in the tank for this technique? Honestly, I think the fact that every new "groundbreaking" news release about LLMs has come alongside a swath of d…