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

Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 35 posts

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#11

Post by gmuslera »

I think it adds value. Having a conversation with/around a book/document with an AI is a good use case, and having that feature as a not forced option in a book management solution a good match.

It is not something that works regardless if we configure or activate it or not. It may broaden the AI use for people that find that useful? Yes. Would that end being dependency on a particular provider? Maybe on how we use it. At some point a lot of those decisions were taken in the past by most of the rest, like using search engines or a narrow/builtin set of browsers or desktop/mobile OSs. If using AIs is a concern then the ship has sailed long ago for many bigger things already.

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#12

Post by TechSquidTV »

afavour wrote: post #8
gardenerik wrote: post #2

I struggle to understand the pushback against AI features. As long as the feature isn't intrusive, it seems like a minor addition, and may even be useful to some people. LLMs are here to stay, there is no denying that at this point.

My problem is that all AI features are currently wildly underpriced by tech giants who are providing subsidies in the hopes of us becoming reliant upon them. Not to mention it means we’re feeding all kinds of our own behavioural data to these giants with very little visibility. Any new feature should face a very simple cost/benefit analysis. The average user currently can’t do that with AI. I think AI in some form is…

Summarizing text can very easily be done by local AI. Low powered, and free. for this type of task, there is essentially no reason to pay.

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#13

Post by throwawa14223 »

gardenerik wrote: post #2

I struggle to understand the pushback against AI features. As long as the feature isn't intrusive, it seems like a minor addition, and may even be useful to some people. LLMs are here to stay, there is no denying that at this point.

Why is it obvious they are here to stay?

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#14

Post by Arodex »

gmuslera wrote: post #11

I think it adds value. Having a conversation with/around a book/document with an AI is a good use case, and having that feature as a not forced option in a book management solution a good match. It is not something that works regardless if we configure or activate it or not. It may broaden the AI use for people that find that useful? Yes. Would that end being dependency on a particular provider? Maybe on how we use i…

[flagged]

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#15

Post by _23sd »

The addition doesn't really bother me because Calibre is already full of features that seem utterly useless, so I trust its author to add new stuff without ruining the parts that are useful to me. Still, does anyone actually use "ChatGPT bolted onto the ebook reader" type features for anything besides cheating on school assignments? Lack of web search tools makes them suboptimal for asking clarifying questions or getting recommendations. Makes some sense on a Kindle where you can't exactly alt-tab to ask ChatGPT directly, not so much in a desktop application.

Not to say that there's no use case (I'd be interested to try a LLM-aided notetaking tool), just that adding a chat box is hardly a feature.

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#16

Post by afavour »

TechSquidTV wrote: post #12
afavour wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem is that all AI features are currently wildly underpriced by tech giants who are providing subsidies in the hopes of us becoming reliant upon them. Not to mention it means we’re feeding all kinds of our own behavioural data to these giants with very little visibility. Any new feature should face a very simple cost/benefit analysis. The average user currently can’t do that with AI. I think AI in some form is…

Summarizing text can very easily be done by local AI. Low powered, and free. for this type of task, there is essentially no reason to pay.

Which is not what is happening here. I think a lot of people’s objections would be resolved by a local model.

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#18

Post by troyvit »

TechSquidTV wrote: post #12
afavour wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My problem is that all AI features are currently wildly underpriced by tech giants who are providing subsidies in the hopes of us becoming reliant upon them. Not to mention it means we’re feeding all kinds of our own behavioural data to these giants with very little visibility. Any new feature should face a very simple cost/benefit analysis. The average user currently can’t do that with AI. I think AI in some form is…

Summarizing text can very easily be done by local AI. Low powered, and free. for this type of task, there is essentially no reason to pay.

This is totally true and points to why Calibre's feature adds value. However I think the big players see exactly what you see and are scrambling to become peoples' go-to first. I believe this is for two main reasons. The first is because it's the only way they know how to win, and they don't see any option other than winning. The second is that they want the data that comes with it so they can monetize it. People switching to local models has a chance to take all that away, so cloud providers are doing everything they can to make their models easier to use and more integrated.

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#19

Post by [deleted] »

throwawa14223 wrote: post #13
gardenerik wrote: post #2

I struggle to understand the pushback against AI features. As long as the feature isn't intrusive, it seems like a minor addition, and may even be useful to some people. LLMs are here to stay, there is no denying that at this point.

Why is it obvious they are here to stay?

[deleted]

Re: Calibre adds AI "discussion" feature

#20

Post by another_twist »

_23sd wrote: post #15

The addition doesn't really bother me because Calibre is already full of features that seem utterly useless, so I trust its author to add new stuff without ruining the parts that are useful to me. Still, does anyone actually use "ChatGPT bolted onto the ebook reader" type features for anything besides cheating on school assignments? Lack of web search tools makes them suboptimal for asking clarifying questions or get…

Its useful for answering questions related related to back references. eg who was this character if you're reading a novel with too many of these.
Post reply on HN