181–190 of 511 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't do this. A friend did this to me, and after listening to it, I suddenly realized it was AI vomit. My friend wasted an hour of my attention, and I didn't appreciate it.
If it was vomit, why did you spend an hour on it? People complain about 2 minutes of audio sometimes, I cannot imagine a full hour of an unknown podcast, it must have been quite interesting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look I agree with you at a certain level, maybe it can't emulate deep conversations about big topics (maybe it can, I haven't seen an attempt...), but a vast vast majority of podcasts and radio shows are just like this: shallow and incredibly simplified with no more than a nod to the underlying concepts. 70% personality, 20% dumb analogies that the producer thought up in thirty minutes, and Honestly, given the person…
Kind of feels like looking at an overflowing landfill and thinking "I wonder if we can invent a robot that just generates new trash directly into the landfill".
I just made a podcast episode about my company where I work by giving it the website. It was surprisingly realistic. It also made me realize how empty many podcasts actually are. I sent it to my colleagues telling them I "had it produced." I'll reveal the truth tomorrow.
Don't do this. A friend did this to me, and after listening to it, I suddenly realized it was AI vomit. My friend wasted an hour of my attention, and I didn't appreciate it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just turn off the screen with youtube video playing and there's no difference from a podcast? I listen to Perun at the gym every week, audio only.
That's a paid service that some people balk at.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just turn off the screen with youtube video playing and there's no difference from a podcast? I listen to Perun at the gym every week, audio only.
That's a paid service that some people balk at.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I know I'm not the first to say this, but I think what's going on is that these AI things can produce results that are very mid. A sort of extra medium. Experts beat modern LLMs but modern llms are better than a gap. I've seen people manage to wrangle tools like Midjourney to get results that surpass extra medium. And most human artists barely manage to reach medium quality too. The real danger of AI is that, as a…
> as a society, we need a lot of people who will never be anything but mediocre still going for it, so we can end up with a few who do manage to reach excellence Do we though? That seems bleak.
I guess if AIs become excellent at everything, and the gains are shared, and the human race is liberated into a post-scarcity future of gay space communism, then it's fine. But that's not where it's looked like we're heading so far, though - at least in creative fields. I'd include - perhaps not quite yet, but it's close - development in that category. How many on this board started out writing mid-level CRUD apps for a mid-level living? If that path is closed to future devs, how does anyone level up?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Different strokes for different folks... We all seek different kinds of quality; I don't find Peruns videos to have any quality except volume. He reads bullet points he has prepared, and makes predictable dad jokes in monotone, re-uses and reruns the same points, icons, slides, etc. Just personally, I find it really samey and some of the reporting has been delayed so much it's entirely detached from the ground by the…
Drifting off topic, but do you have any examples of those analysis/sitrep content creators you prefer?
https://m.youtube.com/@militaryandhistory
https://m.youtube.com/@suchomimus9921
https://m.youtube.com/@WardCarroll
Fav is probably Suchomimus right now. Updated faster, shorter reports. I feel like I get the info sooner after it happens.
What happens when all our search tools are completely unreliable because it's all generated crap?
I'm already telling my kids they can trust nothing on the internet.
How much of HN now is AI bots?
For things that already have a large body of scholarship, and have a set of fairly solidified interpretations, it is very good at giving summaries. But for works that still remain enigmatic and difficult to interpret, it fails to produce anything new or interesting.
It seems to be a more complex version of ChatGPT, but it has the same underlying problems, so its not useful for someone doing academic work or trying to create something radically new, as with other LLMs in the past.