Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 402 posts

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#321

Post by EasyMark »

fny wrote: post #7

Give it time y'all. This is the first inning, and I'm already terrified. I encourage you to have a conversation with ChatGPT's advanced audio for a taste of what's to come. If you can, have someone talk to it in a relatively unpopular language like Afrikaans or even Icelandic--they will shit their pants.

I don't know, I may be old fashioned, but if I find out that a podcast I like is just audio generated by an AI it's going into the digital garbage bin. I think a lot of people think like me, as I'm not -that- weird. Maybe I'm wrong, and the younger generations are going to welcome in AI as a replacement for humans on something as person as a podcast. It all just seems so fake to me, I have no interest in it.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#322

Post by paulryanrogers »

richardw wrote: post #236
bangaroo wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

point 2 is the thing that i think is most important to point out: "architectures change" sure, that's a fact. let me apply this to other fields: "there could be a battery breakthrough that gives electric cars a 2,000 mile range." "researchers could discover a new way to build nanorobots that attacks cancer directly and effectively cures all versions of it." "we could invent a new sort of aviation engine that is 1,000…

> but most of the current generation of AI hype are a limited number of algorithms and approaches, mixed and matched in different ways, with other features bolted on to try and corral them into behaving as we hope. it is much more realistic to expect that we are in the period of diminishing returns as far as investing in these approaches than it is to believe we'll continue to see earth-shattering growth. 100% agree,…

In 100 years the air may not be breathable, much less have enough CO2 carrying capacity for silicon based AGI

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#323

Post by glandium »

tomcam wrote: post #3

Incredibly, no videos linked in an article about a video newscast. I think this is an example. The AI doesn't even pronounce "AI" correctly. Interestingly, it looks slightly offscreen just the way real newsreaders do when they're on prompter. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aa7Q2S7VWUk They do a lot right. There's interaction between the bots. They look kind of professional but not Los Angeles/New York quality, which…

Watching this, I'm left wondering why my brain doesn't want to blend the visual and the audio. I don't think it's the bad lip sync. I have this weird feeling that these persons, were they real, wouldn't have these voices. But I can't quite put my finger as to why. I haven't watched movies dubs in a while, but maybe that's the same kind of phenomenon that makes dubs sound bad. Or maybe we grow an intuitive sense of what a person's voice might sound like based on the appearance of their face's bone structure and muscles?

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#324

Post by _ea1k »

afavour wrote: post #262
simplyluke wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's funny is every GenAI "incredible email/essay" would be better communicated with the prompt used to generate it.

I’m only half joking when I’ve described ChatGPT-authored emails as a uniquely inefficient transport format. Author feeds bullet points into ChatGPT which burns CPU cycles producing paragraphs of fluff. Recipient feeds paragraphs of fluff into ChatGPT and asks it to summarise into bullet points.

I think you are on to something there. I've heard executives talk about their current AI flow and it all sounds like summarization.

There's an increasing amount of prose written that will only ever be read by LLMs.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#325

Post by SoftTalker »

NemoNobody wrote: post #288
lupusreal wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Write a comment explaining that the ostensibly simple task of writing a dozen or so thank you letters for those socks/etc you received for Christmas can, for some people, be an excruciating task that takes weeks to complete, but with the aid of LLMs can easily be done in an hour. On second thought, you're right. That was easy.

That's old world stuff - I've never sent a thank you card and have lost no sleep bc of it.

I’d prefer to receive no thank you than to receive an AI written one. One says you don’t care, the other says you don’t care but also want to deceive me.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#326

Post by danpalmer »

datahack wrote: post #82

While I enjoyed the article, it’s just another in a line of the same article with different flavors and authors that all have the same fundamental error. The prevailing counterargument against AI consistently hinges on the present state of AI rather than the trajectory of its development: but what matters is not the capabilities of AI as they exist today, but the astonishing velocity at which those capabilities are e…

All S-curves look exponential at some point.

It was unclear if the current wave of AI would be an exponential, or for how long, or if it would end up just being another S-curve. The potential upside hooked a lot of people into action on the VC-maths of "it doesn't matter if it's unlikely, because the upside is just too good".

It is now becoming clear however that we aren't getting AGI. What we have now is fundamentally what we're likely to have in 5-10 years time. I do think we'll find better uses, figure our shit out, and have much more effective products in that time, I think we're entering the "LLM-era" in much the same way as the 2010s were the smartphone era that redefined a lot of things, but in still the same way, a phone of ~2010 isn't materially different to a phone of ~2020, they're still just internet connected, location aware, interfaces to content and services.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#327

Post by abenga »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #124
vunderba wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody trots out this argument. GPT styled LLMs were introduced back in 2018 so SIX years ago. Have they gotten more COHERENT ? Absolutely. Is coherence the same thing as NOVELTY ? NOT EVEN REMOTELY. I've played with markov chains in the 90s that were capable of producing surprising content. Unless there is a radical advancement in the underlying tech, I don't see any indication that they'll be capable of genuine…

If you have a particular style of witty observational humor that you prefer, providing the model some examples of that will help it generate better output. It's capable of generating pretty much anything if you prompt it the right way. For truly nuanced or novel things, you have to give it a nucleus of novelty and axis of nuance for it to start generating things in your desired space.

If I tell it exactly what I want to hear, where's the surprise? Is there any novelty there?

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#328

Post by wlesieutre »

heresie-dabord wrote: post #315
afavour wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m only half joking when I’ve described ChatGPT-authored emails as a uniquely inefficient transport format. Author feeds bullet points into ChatGPT which burns CPU cycles producing paragraphs of fluff. Recipient feeds paragraphs of fluff into ChatGPT and asks it to summarise into bullet points.

> Author feeds bullet points into ChatGPT which burns CPU cycles producing paragraphs of fluff. GOOG, AMZN, and MSFT reportedly need to use nuclear energy to power the LLM farms that we are told we must have. One must ask who (or what) in this feedback loop of inanity is doing the most hallucinating . [1] _ https://apnews.com/article/climate-data-centers-amazon-googl... [2] _ https://www.npr.org/2024/09/20/nx-s1-5120…

Then users turn around and feed the fluff into energy hungry summarizers because who has time for a 5 paragraph email that could’ve been a three point bulleted list?

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#329

Post by lawn »

nsavage wrote: post #97
lawn wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's getting old but there's an xkcd for your kind of reasoning: https://xkcd.com/605/

Isn't this essentially the same argument as "there are only 10 covid cases in this area, nothing to worry about"? It's really missing the point, the point is whether or not exponential growth is happening or not. It doesn't with husbands, it does with covid, time will tell about AI.

The graph depicts linear growth, not exponential. And neither is the growth of AI.

Re: The AI reporter that took my old job just got fired

#330

Post by HKH2 »

xanderlewis wrote: post #298
mjr00 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The younger generation loves short-form, to-the-point stuff. Which is the exact opposite of what the current crop of GenAI makes. In a tiktok video, every sentence, every word counts because there's a time limit. If people don't engage with your content in the first 3 seconds, it's worthless. The video linked in another post starts off with 15 seconds of complete fluff. You'd have better engagement if you have a guy…

> The younger generation loves short-form, to-the-point stuff. Meanwhile, Joe Rogan et al. have 3+ hour long podcasts…

And they have a clips channel for the younger generations.
Post reply on HN