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

ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

awfulannouncing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 169 posts

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#111

Post by fmbb »

echelon wrote: post #90
detourdog wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see SEO as a make work project to support Wall Street valuations. We have SEO content being consumed by content indexing bots for traffic.

> I see SEO as a make work project to support Wall Street valuations. You're missing the whole middle part about users and revenue. SEO alone does not a Wall Street valuation make. Maybe the indictment here should instead be about discovery and how we share ideas and utility with one another.

> You're missing the whole middle part about users and revenue. SEO alone does not a Wall Street valuation make.

Are they? Or are you over-estimating that part?

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#112

Post by low_tech_love »

falcolas wrote: post #102
JAlexoid wrote: post #27

In defense of the AI - the fact that it was her last match has little relevance to the game itself. These are the emotional sprinkles, that AI often misses.(Which is to be expected from an emotionless AI)

Why do we feel the need to defend software bugs? Would we give the same defense of banking software that forgot to carry over the fractions of a penny? It's a software bug, and there's plenty of resources available to the AI's owner to try and address it. It doesn't need a human advocating for it being OK.

The most relevant comment in this entire page. It is for the same reason that many people defended crypto-stuff here in HN for a long time: the hope that one can generate money from nothing. The holy grail of software development is the idea that one may sit down on a computer for a certain amount of hours/days and come out at the other end a millionaire. Crypto gave many people that impression; you simply build some kind of meaningless distributed crypto-driven app and money will start pouring in. Now it’s AI: learn how to develop with LLMs, build some kind of buzzword-filled low-hanging fruit and all of a sudden you can sell your startup for a billion dollars. If you point out to people that that’s bs, they think you’re trying to crush their dreams, that you’re the reason why it’s not working that well. “If only people would understand the crypto/AI revolution…”

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#113

Post by JAlexoid »

alt227 wrote: post #67
JAlexoid wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most game recaps that I've read are no less dry, than the AI generated one. The reviews that come after are typically the ones that cover broader impact. Reviews also include third party commentary and more insights from specialists. The benefit of having a factual recap generated minutes after the game far supersede the value added by a few words from a low paid recap writer hours after the game.

> The benefit of having a factual recap generated minutes after the game far supersede the value added by a few words from a low paid recap writer hours after the game. I guess thats subjective and depends on what the individual finds interesting/important in sport. However including something potentially unecessary is far easier to do and covers more bases than leaving something potentially necessary out.

That's a "kitchen sink" approach, that produces really bad articles that are hard to read.

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#114

Post by stefan_ »

skipants wrote: post #10

It's pretty funny to me that this is used as a hit-piece against AI generated content. Here's an open-secret for everyone: web-based sports content companies have been automatically generating content articles for at least a decade; way before LLMs became popular. It is and was mostly done for search ranking. The more seemingly applicable content, the better your SEO. This situation has probably happened several time…

Not to blow your bubble but uh, yes, everyone is aware, they were garbage then, too.

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#115

Post by iainmerrick »

low_tech_love wrote: post #106
jetrink wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got nerd-snipped by this. I transcribed the match using the whisper-small.en and then asked ChatGPT to create a summary using a neutral prompt: Here is a transcript of a soccer match. In the style of an experienced professional sports reporter, please write a 200 word article about the match. Its summary starts, "In her final professional match, Alex Morgan delivered a performance filled with emotion and resilience…

That’s a very good write up, so good it’s depressing. Am I the only one who is utterly uninterested in reading anything that an AI writes?

If it got the score wrong, it’s not a very good writeup.

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#116

Post by JAlexoid »

falcolas wrote: post #102
JAlexoid wrote: post #27

In defense of the AI - the fact that it was her last match has little relevance to the game itself. These are the emotional sprinkles, that AI often misses.(Which is to be expected from an emotionless AI)

Why do we feel the need to defend software bugs? Would we give the same defense of banking software that forgot to carry over the fractions of a penny? It's a software bug, and there's plenty of resources available to the AI's owner to try and address it. It doesn't need a human advocating for it being OK.

> It's a software bug

Why is it a software bug? Just because you want to see those emotional sprinkles, doesn't mean that the person planning how to create the article decided that.

You personally and emotionally decided, without evidence, that this is a bug. No one else is saying that.

Imagine if you asked an AI to describe the discovery of radiation, and the AI deiced for you to talk about the personal life of Marie Curie for 2/3 of the whole text.

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#117

Post by alt227 »

JAlexoid wrote: post #113
alt227 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The benefit of having a factual recap generated minutes after the game far supersede the value added by a few words from a low paid recap writer hours after the game. I guess thats subjective and depends on what the individual finds interesting/important in sport. However including something potentially unecessary is far easier to do and covers more bases than leaving something potentially necessary out.

That's a "kitchen sink" approach, that produces really bad articles that are hard to read.

Thats your subjective opinion again, and thats fine you are entitled to it.

But there are many different types of people who might disagree with you or prefer something different. You seem to be just stating that what you want is what everyone should think is best.

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#118

Post by jetrink »

regretaverse wrote: post #105
jetrink wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got nerd-snipped by this. I transcribed the match using the whisper-small.en and then asked ChatGPT to create a summary using a neutral prompt: Here is a transcript of a soccer match. In the style of an experienced professional sports reporter, please write a 200 word article about the match. Its summary starts, "In her final professional match, Alex Morgan delivered a performance filled with emotion and resilience…

OpenAI transcription & LLM is likely more costly than what they're willing to splurge on this. Care to link soccer.txt, so I can try with Llama 3 / 3.1?

Here you go: https://pastebin.com/QXzg95AV

One thing to try is only using the post-match commentary, which starts after the line containing 'final whistle.' When I did this, the result was more factually accurate, while still focusing on Morgan.

https://chatgpt.com/share/9c122702-b46f-4e5e-bd05-e063a74126...

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#119

Post by slantedview »

GrinningFool wrote: post #75
karaterobot wrote: post #52

> ESPN made a point to note that “each AI-generated recap will be reviewed by a human editor to ensure quality and accuracy.” It’s unclear if the human editor failed to notice Morgan’s absence or also decided it was not worth mentioning. I don't believe they'll have a human editor ensure quality and accuracy. The whole point of having AI write your stories is to minimize the number of people they have to pay, so payi…

> but what they will not do is pay a professional editor to do their job the right way, this I can guarantee I don't think that holds up. They can save a lot of money by using generated articles, but they lose customer (advertiser) confidence if the content isn't accurate. One editor per ten replaced writers is still a significant cost savings. A few iterations from now we might see editors getting replaced too, but…

> but they lose customer (advertiser) confidence if the content isn't accurate

The content isn't what it should have been, which is why the previous commenter rightly assumes that no editor looked at it.

Re: ESPN AI recap of Alex Morgan’s final professional match fails to mention her

#120

Post by fullshark »

LordDragonfang wrote: post #45
airstrike wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has gone unnoticed or noticed to little fanfare To be fair, I don't think it's gone unnoticed at all

Not by people in the know, no. But I'd say 80% of "normal" people reading sports websites probably had no idea until now, and the only difference is that (gen)AI is suddenly a "feature" to be boasted about to customers to make shareholders happy. And suddenly all of these normal people are starting to have opinions on it.

I think people have noticed if not explicitly. They end up going toward platforms that have real humans on them (social media, message boards, substack) and not really understanding it's because they read a bunch of algorithmically generated noise on "traditional" published websites and moved on.
Post reply on HN